On Fri, 07 Sep 2007, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On 9/7/07, Jean Delvare <[email protected]> wrote:
> > To go one step further, I am questioning the real value of this naming
> > exception for these "unique" platform devices. On top of the bugs I
> > mentioned above, it has potential for compatibility breakage: adding a
Agreed. But the breakage might happen anyway, if you need to move
attributes from foo.0 to foo.1. After that first time, userspace will learn
to hunt down all foo.* after what it wants, but still...
> If a device has a <name>.<instance> scheme this implies possibility of
> having several instances of said device in a box. There are a few of
No, it doesn't. It allows for, but it does not imply anything.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
-
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]
