From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22446 invoked by uid 1002); 21 Oct 2003 08:01:42 -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 73 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2003 08:01:41 -0000 From: Ernst Herzberg Reply-To: earny@net4u.de To: "C. Brewer" , gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:01:37 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <200310202256.34889.cbrewer@stealthaccess.net> In-Reply-To: <200310202256.34889.cbrewer@stealthaccess.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200310211001.37261.earny@net4u.de> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] udev implementation X-Archives-Salt: ea61f088-ebc1-4f34-b1d3-f92f3c766a8c X-Archives-Hash: 98d3c5bb498bbd5796a2875710052e94 On Dienstag, 21. Oktober 2003 07:56, C. Brewer wrote: > I tried out the 0.2 version of udev today, and I realize that its way > rough so early in the development, but I must say I was disappointed > with it's current implementation ( and the lousy attitude of the udev > FAQ "if you don't like it stick with devfs" didn't help). [....] You should try 'udev 003 release' first ;-) http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0310.2/0233.html Still buggy, but.... ~Earny -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list