On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, Richard Gooch wrote:
>
> > It still eludes me why a new device FS was developed when devfs
> > already has the mechanisms that are needed.
>
> For one, driverfs can be made mandatory. Sure we could do the same for
> devfs, but there are probably an army of people who don't want
> a mandatory devfs.
... for another, there's an old saying about doing one thing and doing
it well. Devfs is _not_ following that.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 21:00:36 EST