You might want to Cc to him directly: I hear he filters his mail. I
certainly do (stuff Cc'ed or just sent directly gets read sooner than
kernel-list stuff).
> Due to problems with the network routing 'round here, I haven't been able
> to look at the archives and grub in the archives for previous discussion.
> However, I do know of a few reasons that I think the devfs is a good thing
> for the kernel.
>
> 1) better device naming conventions. Some people will need some time to
> get used to it, but hey, progress over whinings.
People who don't like the new names can always use the compatibility
names. Although in my personal setup I disable the compatibility
entries (I've put my money where my mouth is;-).
> 2) Speedups on heavily used large scale linux systems, not to mention
> simply the ability to scale effectively. This is a MAJOR concern for 2.3,
> considering 2.3 will be the base for the next stable release. Just
> imagine the hardware we'll have by then!
I'm still considering hacking the SCSI disc driver to support >16
discs by using the devfs automagic device numbering. I just haven't
had time to do it. A volunteer would be welcome. Hint, hint.
> 3) TOTAL backwards compatibility. I'm using the alsa sound drivers, and
> major/minor devices that are needed can be created normally. TTY devices
> with /dev/tty? names and REAL major minor nodes can be autogenerated.
Yep, that compatibility is essential. I even used it myself when only
a few drivers supported devfs :-)
> 4) Richard Gooch is SUPER FAST with updates!!! C'mon?!?!?! Just having
> such a proactive maintainer should make you happy enough to make room for
> even just optional devfs in the official tree!
>
> Three cheers for Richard!
<blush>
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