On 05/08/12 07:16, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 18:23 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
>> On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 05:59:45PM -0700, Greg KH wrote
>>> On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 02:52:33PM -0700, Luca Barbato wrote:
>>>> On 04/05/12 14:35, Walter Dnes wrote:
>>>>>  What could work is a shim or compatability layer that gets
>>>>> called, and pre-processes requests and forwards them to mdev.
>>>> That's my idea =)
>>> and then, look, you have reimplemented udev.
>>>
>>> {sigh}
>>   Actually, more like what udev *USED TO BE*, namely a simple devicei
>> manager.
> Maybe Greg understands how udev was 
... and of course the horrors that were called "devfs" and such - we
remember :)
> and how it should be better than you
> do,
err, that's bad. Maybe I know my needs better than other people? Maybe
my needs don't completely overlap with those of other people. Maybe
their vision of a tightly coupled everything doesn't even cover my
usecases nicely ...
>  since he wrote it.
>
>
Classical argumentum ad verecundiam, you win a cookie.



Reply via email to