"Brown, Len" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> >Len Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> I deleted /proc/acpi/button on purpose,
> >> did you have a use for those files?
> >
> >Can we put it back, please?
>
> of course.
Thanks.
> >We cannot go ripping out stuff which applications and users
> >are currently using without quite a lot of preparation.
>
> Agreed. Although the implementation of the /proc lid status
> file is fundamentally flawed in that even its name in /proc
> is able to change and thus it is a totally bogus user-space API,
> it was not thoughtful to delete it.
>
> I'm open to suggestions on how to approach this transition.
> I can make ACPI_PROC a static build option -- what else
> can I do to ease the transition in this, our stable release?
Well I don't know how awkward this would be from an implementation POV, but
can we just leave the legacy /proc stuff there until the /sys interface is
all in place and userspace is upgraded? Then kill all the /proc stuff
later?
We could also print a rude message the first time someone tries to use a
deprecated /proc file, just to help push the userspace tool developers
along. Although I note that sys_bdflush() is still with us ;)
-
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]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |