On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 11:17:20AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote: > On 01-01-06 Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > mizar:[~/src/linux/2.4.0/linux] egrep 'VERSION|LEVEL' Makefile | head -3 > > VERSION = 2 > > PATCHLEVEL = 4 > > SUBLEVEL = 0 > > mizar:[~/src/linux/2.4.0/linux] grep -B 1 ^CONFIG_DEVFS_FS > > Documentation/Configure.help > > /dev file system support (EXPERIMENTAL) > > CONFIG_DEVFS_FS > > mizar:[~/src/linux/2.4.0/linux] grep ' CONFIG_DEVFS_FS ' fs/Config.in > > dep_bool '/dev file system support (EXPERIMENTAL)' CONFIG_DEVFS_FS > > $CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL > > > It will only show up if CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL is defined. > > Hm, did you bother to read the explanation of devfs? There you find a > statement, that is "work in progress" and so I wouldn't consider it > experimental anymore.
I did read the description; in fact, I use devfs. Its description has had the note: This is work in progress. If you want to use this you *must* read Documentation/filesystems/devfs/README since it was first integrated into the 2.3 series (2.3.46). Hell, the devfs patches against 2.1 had exactly the same text, and there have certainly been a number of bugfixes since then. I wouldn't read "work in progress" to mean "no longer experimental". Hopefully, devfs will receive much more widespread testing with the release of 2.4. Bugs will be chased out, or their rarity will be demonstrated, and eventually it will no longer depend on CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL (at which point it will get much, much more widespread testing, etc. etc.). That said, I think we should definitely support devfs as it seems destined to become a standard feature (and makes life easier to boot). -- - mdz
pgpoLPJPHql7u.pgp
Description: PGP signature
