On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 03:18:12PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 03:05:31PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >
> > We should be using groups, not attribute lists, for classes to allow
> > subdirectories, and soon, binary files. Groups are just more flexible
> > overall,
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 03:05:31PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
> We should be using groups, not attribute lists, for classes to allow
> subdirectories, and soon, binary files. Groups are just more flexible
> overall, so add them.
>
> The dev_attrs list will go away after all in-kernel
We should be using groups, not attribute lists, for classes to allow
subdirectories, and soon, binary files. Groups are just more flexible
overall, so add them.
The dev_attrs list will go away after all in-kernel users are converted
to use dev_groups.
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
---
We should be using groups, not attribute lists, for classes to allow
subdirectories, and soon, binary files. Groups are just more flexible
overall, so add them.
The dev_attrs list will go away after all in-kernel users are converted
to use dev_groups.
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 03:05:31PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
We should be using groups, not attribute lists, for classes to allow
subdirectories, and soon, binary files. Groups are just more flexible
overall, so add them.
The dev_attrs list will go away after all in-kernel users
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 03:18:12PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 03:05:31PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
We should be using groups, not attribute lists, for classes to allow
subdirectories, and soon, binary files. Groups are just more flexible
overall, so add
6 matches
Mail list logo