Re: DEVFS is very good compared to UDEV

[viro]

On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 02:21:03PM -0800, Hua Zhong wrote:

> But I do have sth fair to say about this "unmaintained" part.
> 
> >From my memory, at some point in time, somebody (Al Viro?) reviewed
> devfs code and flamed the author in public (klml), throwing lots of bad
> impolite words to him, which I think was the biggest reason that the
> author stopped maintaining it.

Oh, really?  That "flame in public" was after _many_ months of pointing
to the same problems in private - with zero effect.

If maintainer sits on exploitable holes for ~18 months and does not care to do
anything, his code is unmaintained.  If same maintainer keeps pretending in
public that everything is fine, he can expect to have the truthfulness of his
statements challenged.  Also in public.  If the situation persists even after
that, then yes, there will be rather unflattering things to say.

Don't delude yourself - critical parts of devfs had not been maintained for
quite a while before Richard had disappeared.  It's not the effect of flames
- it's their cause and it predates them by _far_.
-
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/