On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 11:04:03AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: | Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 10:24:31AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: | >> Chris Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | >> > On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 09:53:14 -0800 | >> > Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | >> >> When did devfs become deprecated? | >> > | >> > With the 2.6 kernels. | >> > | >> > http://lwn.net/Articles/61490/ | >> > (look under "the status of dynamic devices in 2.6") | >> | >> This seems to say udev isn't ready for prime time. | > | > 2.6 is a fast-moving world, and the page above dates from 2.6.0-test11. | | So is the situation a bit saner now?
1. devfs isn't gone, merely deprecated. "Deprecated" means it's
still there and still works as usual, but isn't recommended
and will go away at some future point.
2. the classic static /dev hasn't gone away (yet) either.
3. as of version 0.21 (the one in sid) udev was declared stable.
That declaration came a while after 2.6.0 was released as
stable.
The thing with udev is it is all userspace, therefore it works with
any 2.6 kernel (that has SYSFS in it). You can upgrade udev without
touching your kernel, unlike devfs. I've been using udev for a few
weeks now (since 0.18 arrived in "experimental") and I haven't had any
major problems (only a hurdle or two).
-D
--
The Consultant's Curse:
When the customer has beaten upon you long enough, give him
what he asks for, instead of what he needs. This is very strong
medicine, and is normally only required once.
www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/ jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
