On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 10:50 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 06:22:55PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > Before I get patching, I wanted to get a consensus about what the best > > patches would be, since there's a few options: > > Wait, why do this at all? > > To get rid of a few udev rules that group things into subdirectories? > > Is that really a sane/wise/useful thing to do? Is your goal to get rid > of _all_ udev rules by doing this? If not, then why worry about it? > To get rid of all udev rules that set a NAME based only on information received from the kernel. Why waste cycles and resources constructing a static name just because the kernel's static name doesn't match the standard? Scott -- Scott James Remnant scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
