Re: debugfs in the namespace

From: Phil Lougher
Date: Thu Dec 16 2004 - 21:29:43 EST

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:21:34 +0100, Bernd Eckenfels
<ecki-news2004-05@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In article <20041216144531.3a8d988c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> you wrote:
> > Otherwise, /dbg sounds good.
> I dont think that a root level directory, especially with an unreadable name
> is a good idea. Why dont we at least try to keep the namespace clean?

Are you suggesting we should rename "etc", "mnt" etc? :-) I like
"/dbg" it follows the gdb, kgdb naming convention and it was the Unix
way to name things like this. Though perhaps debugfs should have been
named dbgfs in this case...

I don't like "/.debug", hiding it in way this implies that you don't
think it should be there (and so you've hidden it). A properly
decided upon mount point shouldn't have these connotations? If you're
using debugfs I think you should want to have the mount point visible.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at