Re: udev and devfs - The final word

[Linus Torvalds]

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004, Andries Brouwer wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 07:04:17PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > I agree that for a stable kernel we should then go back to "best effort" 
> > mode, where for simple politeness reasons we should try to keep device 
> > numbers as stable as we can.
> 
> Good - you understand now.

Oh, _I_ always understood. You were the one that was arguing for stable
numbers as somehow important. I'm just telling you that they aren't
stable, and that a user application that depends on their stability or
their uniqieness is BROKEN.

> So, the right setup - you call it politeness, I call it quality
> of implementation - is to have both stable names and stable numbers,
> in as many cases as possible.

And I still disagree. You seem to think that this is an "absolute 
goodness", and call it a quality issue.

While I personally strongly believe that it is a bug in user space to
care, and that it is not a quality issue at all, but rather a "allow buggy
and/or nonconverted user space to work".

In other words, it's not about "quality", as much as about compatibility 
with applications that are old and/or braindead. Big difference.

		Linus
-
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/