From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261919AbVGSCwM (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:52:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261922AbVGSCwM (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:52:12 -0400 Received: from atpro.com ([12.161.0.3]:32774 "EHLO atpro.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261919AbVGSCwK (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:52:10 -0400 Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:51:47 -0400 From: Jim Crilly To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Richard Gooch , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.12-git Message-ID: <20050719025146.GM3550@mail> Mail-Followup-To: Jan Engelhardt , Richard Gooch , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20050621062926.GB15062@kroah.com> <20050620235403.45bf9613.akpm@osdl.org> <20050621151019.GA19666@kroah.com> <20050623010031.GB17453@mikebell.org> <20050623045959.GB10386@kroah.com> <17115.55954.942676.450479@mailix.sanjose.privnets> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/18/05 10:12:29PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > Something's wondering me, though: > FreeBSD "just" (5.0) introduced devfs, so either they are behind The Facts > (see udev FAQ), or devfs (anylinux/anybsd) is not so bad after all. There's not much to wonder about here, the basic idea of devfs is a good one which is why udev was written. The problems expressed on lkml about devfs were with that specifically implementation, if a better implementation had been merged originally udev might have never been created. I really doubt FreeBSD took the Linux devfs code and integrated it with their kernel, so the fact that FreeBSD is using a devfs now simply means they like the idea of a dynamic /dev as well. > > > > Jan Engelhardt Jim.