On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 01:36:39PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Greg KH (greg@xxxxxxxxx) said: > > On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 01:01:46AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > > > > And, random other stuff, of course. > > > > Full udev support? > > > > Please? Pretty please? > > > > What, do you expect me to go and get the whole community to adopt a > > common device naming standard first before you will do this? > > The problem is more or less this: > > - Without a new device naming standard that offers persistent names, > what really does it gain you? I know, and I agree. Well, I like my pretty, tiny /dev tree, but that's just me :) And I'm trying to move toward getting such a standard, but the people who are supposed to be taking the next step, seem to have disappeared again. Time to go kick some DCL[1] members around again... > I'm not averse to using it, but if you're not changing the device > names, most of the useful functionality could be done just by > using the dev.d callouts without actually having udev manage > /dev. That's a good point, and should be worthy of allowing udev to be installed by default. That way things like HAL and gnome-vfs can still work properly, as they chain off of those callouts. thanks, greg k-h [1] Data Center Linux project from OSDL: http://www.osdl.org/lab_activities/data_center_linux/ of which Red Hat is a member, but doesn't seem to be taking an active interest in :(
