Re: devfs vs udev FAQ from the other side

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On Wednesday 14 September 2005 21:13, David Lang wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Robert Love wrote:
> 
> >>   Took an actual devfs system of mine and disabled devfs from the
> >>   kernel, then enabled hotplug and sysfs for udev to run.  make clean
> >>   and surprise surprise, kernel is much bigger. Enable netlink stuff and
> >>   it's bigger still. udev is only smaller if like Greg you don't count
> >>   its kernel components against it, even if they wouldn't otherwise need
> >>   to be enabled. Difference is to the tune of 604164 on udev and 588466
> >>   on devfs. Maybe not a lot in some people's books, but a huge
> >>   difference from the claims of other people that devfs is actually
> >>   bigger.
> >
> > What modern system, though, could survive without hotplug and sysfs and
> > netlink?  You need to have those components, you want those features,
> > anyhow.
> 
> most servers and embedded systems can survive just fine without hotplug 
> (in fact hotplug is frequently the slowest part of the boot).
> 

I wonder why udev or devfs is so much needed for an embedded system with
a static and very limited set of devices? Make static /dev and get rid
of both.

And as far as servers go - you start them and you leave them alone. Who
cares how long this things boots if you do it once a month?

-- 
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/