From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262772AbTLWXEI (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2003 18:04:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262784AbTLWXEI (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2003 18:04:08 -0500 Received: from peabody.ximian.com ([141.154.95.10]:5607 "EHLO peabody.ximian.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262772AbTLWXDm (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2003 18:03:42 -0500 Subject: RE: DEVFS is very good compared to UDEV From: Rob Love To: hzhong@cisco.com Cc: "'Jari Soderholm'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <008901c3c9a8$97ac5c50$ca41cb3f@amer.cisco.com> References: <008901c3c9a8$97ac5c50$ca41cb3f@amer.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1072220603.8404.1.camel@fur> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-8) Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 18:03:23 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2003-12-23 at 18:00, Hua Zhong wrote: > Me neither :-) and when he is not flaming me (which I have not got the > chance yet), it's fun to read. But I hate him, you know, because I now > tend to be influenced by the way he (and several others on this list) > writes emails, and that's not nice in a corporate environment!! You should not hate anyone. But especially not Al. > It's just my impression that around that time core developers had > decided to replace devfs with a new model. If I were in ths same shoes, > I would probably also stop maintaining it. Then 2 years later when > somebody asks, the reason to replace my code shouldn't be > "unmaintained". Just the technical reasons should be enough. :-) Sure. But, it is unmaintained today, regardless of why, and that is a factor in deciding how to proceed. Rob Love