Khimenko Victor writes:
> 7-Jun-00 22:52 you wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 07, 2000, Richard Gooch <rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Hi, Johannes. I'm wondering what's happened as a result of our
> >> discussions a couple of months ago? You were planning on making heavy
> >> use of devfs+devfsd in the USB code. How's that going?
>
> > Slowly. I had gotten most of the code developed and working, but then I
> > received an email from Randy Dunlap, the USB maintainer. He had a
> > discussion with Linus about the subject. I've included the email at the
> > end of my mail.
>
> > I don't know what to do now. I've been spending some time on a white
> > paper which describes the problems we are running into and why I
> > wanted to use devfs to facilitate solving the problems. However,
> > I'm unsure it will make any difference. People seem to want a hacked
> > together kludge than something sensible (devfs IMHO).
>
> Looks like the only solution is to go "devfs (reiserfs, raid, etc)
> way": keep it as separate patch for 2.4 (2.6, 2.8) and merge in 2.5
> (2.7, 2.9). Most peoples out there are NOT kernel developers. They
> want to hear sound, use USB mouse and not think about kernel at
> all. They DO NOT want to play with ALSA, devfs unless it's included
> in distribution by default. For them devfs requirement for USB is
> evil. So USB can not rely on devfs (for now) :-/ This mean: we need
> some kludgy solution for 2.4. It does not mean that such kludges
> should be with us forever.
I'd suggest against implementing kludged-up workarounds to devfs as
"temporary solutions". It may prove to be wasted effort in the long
run. Devfs is evolving into something that should be more palatable
for more people. Furthermore, adding some of the features of devfs to
usbdevfs is a seriously retrograde step. Why duplicate the code?
I'm in the process of removing the devfs multi-mount code, which will
simplify the implementation somewhat. The new VFS binding code can be
used instead. So hopefully some of the detractors will be happier.
Linus has also said he hopes to see devfs evolve into something
better. Unfortunately, he hasn't said what, nor has he answered my
hails to talk to him in person and discuss devfs developments. Maybe
someone on the USB team can get his attention?
Regards,
Richard....
Permanent: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Current: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|