Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 30 Oct 2000 17:30:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 30 Oct 2000 17:30:16 -0500 Received: from www.inreko.ee ([195.222.18.2]:47026 "EHLO www.inreko.ee") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 30 Oct 2000 17:30:07 -0500 Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 00:38:01 +0200 From: Marko Kreen To: Mirko Klemm Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: request advice: how stable is devfs in 2.4.0-test9? Message-ID: <20001031003801.A2172@l-t.ee> In-Reply-To: <00103022454801.00908@trabant> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00103022454801.00908@trabant>; from Mirko.Klemm@t-online.de on Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 10:45:48PM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 10:45:48PM +0100, Mirko Klemm wrote: > Could anyone please send me a comment on how actually usable the devfs > support in the 2.4.0 test series is at the moment? Fine. I was forced to use it from 2.3.99-something and have not had any problems with it. (I lifted whole system from one disk to another and forgot to create /dev :) > I am currently using 2.4.0-test* as an "ordinary user" and want to try some > of the 2.4 specific new features out, but this is my only system and I don't > want it to be messed up so much, so I'd like to hear some comments first. > Which version of devfsd/utils is needed? I have devfsd 1.3.10. You better be sure you have following lines in devfsd.conf: REGISTER .* MKOLDCOMPAT UNREGISTER .* RMOLDCOMPAT You can later reconfigure most stuff to use new layout but especially X is a pain. -- marko - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/