Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.12-git

[Bill Gatliff <bgat@billgatliff.com>]

David:

David Brownell wrote:

>The downside of "disable-and-remove-later" is that it becomes
>too easy to just re-enable the Kconfig stuff rather than just
>fixing the userspace bugs.  Expecting userspace to change at
>any point before it absolutely _must_ tends to be a formula
>for userspace never changing, sadly enough.  
>
>If 2.6.13 doesn't remove devfs, when will it really go away?
>  
>

Good point.  I've come this far somewhat reluctantly, but can see that 
udev is a better long-term solution.  Once devfs is gone, it's easier 
for me to justify doing the work to go fully over to udev (GregKH, can 
you post a link or two to those "packages" you refer to?).

And also, once devfs is gone it's an easier economic decision for my 
customers, too: either they move ahead and get whatever new features 
that non-devfs kernels offer, or they do the work to keep the current 
stuff in the state they want it.  It's their call, I (sometimes) get 
paid either way...

And it isn't like just my customers would be in this situation, everyone 
will have to face it.  So it's "fair" for everyone.

So, I guess I'm into the "say goodbye to devfs" camp now.  In case 
anyone asks, that is.  :^)


b.g.

-- 
Bill Gatliff
Build a man a fire, and he's warm for the rest of the night.
Set a man on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
   -- Anonymous
bgat@billgatliff.com