On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 09:27:38PM +0000, Roger Leigh wrote: > Our personal preferences here aren't really the issue here. Even > though it's not the default, the devfs scheme is a reality, and needs > supporting.
I disagree. the devfs naming is non-standard and broken. udev should be fixed. > Would you accept a patch to add e.g. an --nvram= option to specify the > device? Your code doesn't need to hard code anything except a > default; as long as the user can specify an alternative, that would be > sufficiently flexible. absolutly not. that is utter creeping featurism. users are confused enough about how to configure yaboot they do NOT need more useless config options so people can have random /dev directories. /dev/nvram has always been where its at, and where it should remain. fix udev, don't bloat yaboot. > Additional autodetection is just the icing on the cake. unecessary bloat. I won't support random unpredictable /dev > If you look at the patch, it's just six extra lines of code, plus > replacement of the hard-coded device name with a variable. Supporting > additional devices would not require any extra lines of code, since > it's processed in a for loop: > > for dev in /dev/misc/nvram /dev/nvram; do not the point. I will not support endless locations for a STANDARD device. > ... > > Given the simplicity of the patch, and its extensibility should any > other device names come into use, please could you apply it? No. it is not necessary. -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
pgpnu2ncbsgT2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
