Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Kernel sources thread
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:13:57
Message-Id: 1090442410.11373.139.camel@localhost
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Kernel sources thread by Travis Tilley
1 On Wed, 2004-07-21 at 06:34, Travis Tilley wrote:
2 > 1) udev is either ready or it isnt. the fact that you need to use a device
3 > tarball for entries udev doesnt support shows me that it isnt ready. what's
4 > the point of using a device management system if you're going to just dump a
5 > bunch of extra dev entries in there anyway? if udev were ready, this wouldnt
6 > be necessary.
7
8 Most of those drivers are not sysfs-aware and simply have not been
9 updated by the various authors. Most of them are non-kernel modules,
10 such as VMware.
11
12 > 3) devfs isnt going away any time soon, and there will be people like me who
13 > dont think it's a good idea to risk bugs for no apparent benefit.
14
15 Perhaps the next stable kernel version, if what I've been reading holds
16 true.
17
18 > 4) it makes sense to keep supporting devfs even after it's ripped out of the
19 > kernel, which i think isnt until after the /next/ stable kernel series. since
20 > we still support 2.4 as the default (on a few archs anyways) i think even
21 > when it is ripped out, people will be using a kernel series that still has it
22 > for a -while-. if it werent for this tendency to not use the latest stable
23 > kernel, i wouldnt have had to move the 2.6 linux-headers into their own
24 > package just to support nptl properly on archs other than amd64.
25
26 Agreed, we will have to maintain support for some time to come.
27
28 > bah, i've been suckered into installing udev... so i might as well keep it
29 > until something breaks. i disabled the tarball hack since it was making /dev
30 > ugly and cluttered... though i admit it seems to be more ready than i thought
31 > it was. at least for now i can have both and always make devfs mount on
32 > boot... please dont think seriously about removing support for that. at least
33 > not until after we all move over to 2.10 anyways. :/
34
35 I find the flexibility it gives me to be much better than devfs, and I
36 enjoy having the "standard" Linux device naming that we're all used to
37 having from before devfs. Currently, I use it to create custom /dev/
38 entries for specific pieces of hardware, like /dev/usbkey and
39 /dev/archos, along with the "standard" device nodes for those devices,
40 so I could setup hotplug.d with a script to automatically mount them
41 upon them being plugged into my machine. I find it to be far superior
42 to using devfs+supermount, since there's nothing "fooling" the kernel
43 into thinking a device is always mounted.
44
45 --
46 Chris Gianelloni
47 Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
48 Gentoo Linux
49
50 Is your power animal a penguin?

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Kernel sources thread Martin Schlemmer <azarah@g.o>