On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 05:13:51PM -0400, Chris Snook wrote:
> You're correct that dynamic major/minor numbers are sufficient for most
> purposes, but embedded users really need their static numbers. As for
> ripping out major/minor numberings, that's a non-starter. Too much of our
> device management infrastructure is based around this numbering scheme, and
> there isn't really anything wrong with it to justify breaking everything in
> the change.
>
> As a rule of thumb, if you ever find yourself wondering why we still
> support doing statically something we can now do dynamically, the answer is
> generally that doing it dynamically sucks for embedded.
And not only embedded. I'm quite happy _not_ running udev on anything
I have root on, except for one test box set exactly to make sure that
patches do not break things for udev-infested boxen.
-
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]
