On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 07:02:58PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > 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? Because of history here? Can't you live with input devices having a few rules in udev? Is it really that hard to maintain? :) Becides input, what other subsystem do you see such kernel changes being needed for? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
