From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3707 invoked by uid 1002); 21 Oct 2003 06:18:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 16772 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2003 06:18:01 -0000 Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 02:17:59 -0400 From: Jon Portnoy To: "C. Brewer" Cc: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20031021061759.GA14910@cerberus.oppresses.us> References: <200310202256.34889.cbrewer@stealthaccess.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200310202256.34889.cbrewer@stealthaccess.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] udev implementation X-Archives-Salt: 8043c780-85fe-43bf-bfa4-8ed5a67a3ab7 X-Archives-Hash: 42da65fa36c338c600295b8ba938fc9f On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 10:56:19PM -0700, C. Brewer wrote: Content-Description: signed data > > Forgive me if I've gone delusional.. I was just under the impression that udev > was going to do everything that devfsd does now _and_ add name mapping, and > apparently I was wrong. I'm just planning for the future since seeing the > udev changes going into our init system.. we got no choice about the devfs > and I feel it's going the same way for udev. I'm not trying to slight the > obviously hard work that was put into it, but what about choice? to devfs or > not to devfs? to udev or not to udev? Or is it merely choice with package > selection, and not with the overall package that is Gentoo? > You can go without devfs easily. You do, however, need to boot with gentoo=nodevfs to tell the init system you don't want devfs. The choice is there. -- Jon Portnoy avenj/irc.freenode.net -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list