On Thursday 28 June 2007 19:20, Yan Seiner wrote: > I don't want to hijack the thread, and I don't want to sound like I'm > whining, but..... There just seems to be a lot of virtual file systems > around. > > First there way static /dev > then there was devfs > then there was udev > now there is mdev (which is udev but for busybox)
devfs said to have unfixable design flaws, so it had to be replaced. When Al Viro says it's unfixable, I tend to believe that. mdev is "light" udev. If your embedded device is not very small, maybe you are better off running udev, not mdev. Otherwise, you may look more into what is missing/buggy in mdev, and help to improve it. > I guess I don't always understand the problems that the newer systems > are fixing. Don't get me wrong, I use udev and devfs quite a bit and I > wouldn't go back to the static /dev. If you really want to know, search lkml archive for "Al Viro" "devfs" -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
