Re: devfs again, (was RE: USB device allocation)

Stephen Frost (sfrost@ns.snowman.net)
Fri, 8 Oct 1999 19:10:02 -0400 (EDT)


On Thu, 7 Oct 1999, Dan Hollis wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Oct 1999, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > Don't you just realize that all the twised symlinc blah blah proposals
> > about devfs you are doing here are a sure sign of a basically bad design?
>
> Im a devfs advocate but I agree the symlink design is bad.
>
> Would an overmountable devfs address most of the arguments against it?

Not sure... Could you elaborate on what you mean by 'overmountable'?

Stephen

-
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.tux.org/lkml/