Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 5 Aug 2002 19:18:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 5 Aug 2002 19:18:09 -0400 Received: from 12-231-243-94.client.attbi.com ([12.231.243.94]:52239 "HELO kroah.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 5 Aug 2002 19:18:08 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 16:19:15 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Rob Landley Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] integrate driverfs and devfs (2.5.28) Message-ID: <20020805231914.GF29396@kroah.com> References: <200207292326.g6TNQcI19062@fachschaft.cup.uni-muenchen.de> <200208051225.g75CP4v316564@pimout4-ext.prodigy.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200208051225.g75CP4v316564@pimout4-ext.prodigy.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: Linux 2.2.21 (i586) Reply-By: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 21:20:41 -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 907 Lines: 23 On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 02:26:35AM -0400, Rob Landley wrote: > > So what's root_dev_names in init/do_mounts.c? If a default naming policy is > so unacceptably evil, is that being removed in 2.5 and everybody being told > to use major/minor for the root device? Yes. Well no. We can't break backwards compatibility with userspace like this. So things like root device naming will have to live on for a while. > By the way, why doesn't imposing consistent predefined major/minor numbers > (0x0301 instead of "hda1") count as "policy"? I'm honestly curious... It does. I want to get rid of it too :) But that's still a ways away... thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/