On Thu, 11 Feb 1999, Monty wrote: > >BTW: devfs is entirely optional: it doesn't break the API. The > >intention is that it is drop-in compatible. A large number of drivers > >now have devfs support (this is included in the patch). > A stable release kernel is not the time to introduce something major > like this... > Am I insane? Am I the only one who believes that 'stable' means > 'don't randomly fuck with it'? I believe "optional" means "can be disabled completely". -Dan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems on recent Linux versions Joerg Schilling
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems on recent Linux versio... Richard Gooch
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems on recent Linux versions Joerg Schilling
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems on recent Linux versio... Richard Gooch
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems on recent Linux ve... Monty
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems on recent Linu... Richard Gooch
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems on recent ... Monty
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems on re... Dan Hollis
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Monty
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Dan Hollis
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Monty
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Dan Hollis
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Richard Gooch
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Richard Gooch
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Richard Gooch
- Re: WG: AW: cdrecord problems o... Richard Gooch
