From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266046AbUBJRDS (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:03:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266030AbUBJRCp (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:02:45 -0500 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([65.200.24.183]:9696 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266037AbUBJRB5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:01:57 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 09:01:57 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Mike Bell Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: devfs vs udev, thoughts from a devfs user Message-ID: <20040210170157.GA27421@kroah.com> References: <20040210113417.GD4421@tinyvaio.nome.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040210113417.GD4421@tinyvaio.nome.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 03:34:18AM -0800, Mike Bell wrote: > I've been reading a lot lately about udev and how it's both very > different to and much better than devfs, and with _most_ of the reasons > given, I can't see how either is the case. I'd like to lay out why I > think that is. Did you read: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/kernel/hotplug/udev_vs_devfs > Basically, udev relies on sysfs exporting > device numbers. Well, imagine for a moment sysfs exported actual device > files instead of just the numbers you'd need to make a device file (a > pretty minor change, though not one I'm advocating). But that is not what sysfs does. And sysfs will not do this. So this point is moot. > Sorry if any of these points has already been discussed on > linux-kernel, I don't have time to read the list so I'm going based on > what's been reported in things like kernel-traffic. They pretty much all have been in the past. Try reading the archives, that's what they are there for :) greg k-h