Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)
Richard Gooch (Richard.Gooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU)
Sat, 8 Aug 1998 11:22:52 +1000
Anthony Barbachan writes:
> >Since I haven't seen even a proposal for an integrated solution, or a
> >comprehensive set of solutions to individual problems, let alone seen
> >any code for a comprehensive solution, it is entirely reasonable that
> >I debate the merits of devfs and refute the misinformation.
> >
> >My fundamental point is that devfs is a worthwile *optional* addition
> >to the kernel. Other solutions (like volume-based mounting) should
> >also be pursued, but this does not mean that devfs is pointless or
> >worthless. The bottom line is that devfs *does* add value to the
> >kernel, and should be available to those who want it.
>
> I could think of a better integrated solution right now. How about a
> Win95-like Device Manager under /proc. This device manager could add the
> functionality to allow us to provide a centralize location to configure
> devices, allocate resources, etc. We could bring in the good points of
> dev_fs such as mounting SCSI drive directly to the location, etc.
See my other post about a devfsd daemon. It would fire up scripts,
GUIs and all kinds of neat things when you hot-plug devices in.
Regards,
Richard....
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html