Re: [gentoo-dev] devfs is dead, let's move on

[Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org>]

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 07:49:34PM +0200, Michiel de Bruijne wrote:
> On Thursday 07 July 2005 00:46, Greg KH wrote:
> > Ok, now that devfs is removed from the 2.6 kernel tree[1], I think it's
> > time to start to revisit some of the /dev naming rules that we currently
> > are living with[2].
> >
> > To start with, the 061 version of udev offers a big memory savings if
> > you use the "default" kernel name of a device[3].  If you do that, it does
> > not create a file in its database in /dev/.udevdb/
> 
> Are there any ebuilds in the tree that are not sysfs/udev-aware?

Not that I am aware of.  Anyone else know of any?

> I.o.w. is it still necessary to have RC_DEVICE_TARBALL="yes" as a
> default or can we move to a pure udev system and change the default to
> "no".

I've been running my boxes successfully with "no" since the option
showed up just fine :)

thanks,

greg k-hj
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list