Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 03:15:14PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >> > [1]: >> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2013-July/012152.html >> >> ... and the patches were rejected. Lennart says that UML providing >> /dev/tty* is wrong, and that UML should call them /dev/hvc* (or >> something). Can we do something about the situation? Can we remove >> /dev/tty*, and provide /dev/hvc*? Will we be breaking existing users? > > Yes, you would be breaking existing users. Starting with anybody with static > /dev. Or a debian userland, for that matter. Any systemd-free setup, > actually.
Systemd does not support a static /dev, so we're talking about non-systemd systems. Ofcourse I reject anything that breaks existing users. > Changing device number assignments is not to be done lightly, whether > they should've been set that way back then or not. I never proposed something as ridiculous as changing device number assignments. I'm trying to add a HVC_DRIVER to um Linux: I enabled it in the Kconfig; any idea how to get devtmpfs to populate /dev with hvc* device nodes now? > As for Lennart's opinion... *shrug* He's free to do whatever he wants > in systemd. It does not translate into having any kind of control over > the kernel. If you care about users, you will stop worrying about different people's "opinions", "control", and work towards a solution. I want great user-experience, period. You can continue to argue endlessly about the sanity of Lennart/systemd for all I care, but you cannot deny the fact that systemd has _users_. Users that you must support. So, what should we do? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
