>
> probably should send this to the main kernel list, but in playing
> around, i noticed that DEVFS_FS is labelled as both OBSOLETE and NEW,
> but in the Kconfig file, it depends on EXPERIMENTAL.
>
> it seems a bit inconsistent for anything to be simultaneously
> EXPERIMENTAL, NEW and OBSOLETE, no?
>
I found the following in udev-FAQ:
Q: Why was devfs marked OBSOLETE if udev is not finished yet?
A: To quote Al Viro (Linux VFS kernel maintainer):
- it was determined that the same thing could be done in userspace
- devfs had been shoved into the tree in hope that its quality will
catch up
- devfs was found to have fixable and unfixable bugs
- the former had stayed around for many months with maintainer
claiming that everything works fine
- the latter had stayed, period.
- the devfs maintainer/author disappeared and stoped maintaining
the code.
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
