On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 09:52:51AM -0400, Florin Malita wrote: > On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 08:19:46 -0700 > Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > What did Linux Journal say? > > "Recently, however, kernel folks realized that one of the SysFS > directories had been put in the wrong place: /sys/block, it was felt, > should really have been /sys/class/block instead. Too late! A great > mass of user code already had come to rely on the existing directory > location. Greg Kroah-Hartman reluctantly had to admit that the SysFS > inconsistency could not be repaired. The first spot of age has appeared > on the pristine face of SysFS." > > http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8231 > > Are they putting words into your mouth? :) Not at all, I remember what I said, and I don't think I said it "reluctantly" at all. :) So, what's the problem? If people remember, /sys/block came way before /sys/class, so it deserves to be in that location. Combine that with the fact that the current class code _can not_ even handle the way /sys/block is set up, means that it could not even be moved right now. And then theres the fact that no one has sent me patches to do so... greg k-h -- Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel. Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/ FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/
