On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 08:23:43PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thursday 15 September 2005 20:04, Kay Sievers wrote:
> > I like that the child devices are actually below the parent device
> > and represent the logical structure. I prefer that compared to the
> > symlink-representation between the classes at the same directory
> > level which the input patches propose.
>
> Why don't we take it a step further and abandon classes altogether?
> This way everything will grow from their respective hardware devices.
That'd seem like a quite a good idea to me. ;)
> Class represent a set of objects with similar characteristics. In
> this regard event0 is no "lesser" than input0.
Well, input0 itself can't be accessed from userspace, so it's different.
> Although they are
> linked they are objects of the same importance. I do want to see
> all input interfaces without scanning bunch of directories.
A directory with symlinks to all the interfaces of the class might make
sense.
--
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs, SuSE CR
-
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]
| |
 |