Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 June 2005 02:32, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>>And yes, we should break compability and come up with a clean
>>implementation.
>
> But those pesky users scream every time we break their mice ;)
>
>>And as the original input event is an abomination I
>>don't see the point in keeping compability with a broken interface.
>>
>
> Why is it abomination (aside from using old mechanism to call
> hotplug)? It looks like it transmits all data necessary to load
> appropriate input handler...
>
Because there are _two_ events with the name 'input'.
Both run under the same name but carry different information.
One is required to load the module and the other is required to create
the device node.
That's what I call an abomination.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke [email protected]
SuSE Linux AG S390 & zSeries
Maxfeldstraße 5 +49 911 74053 688
90409 Nürnberg http://www.suse.de
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
