On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 11:02 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > There were some other opinions voiced including one from the person > who started this discussion. > > So no, the people who write the tools that parse sysfs (like HAL.) > don't appreciate this. > > People who write tools that parse sysfs like shell scripts don't > appreciate it either, as I illustrated.
>From a hal point of view, we don't care if the device name is 'led01' or 'light_to_dance_the_fandango' and from a shell point of view it's probably best for the latter. I think the point Greg tried to make is that it shouldn't matter, and HAL shouldn't export (nor parse) the device name as anything sensible. > You've yet to give any technical reason why we can't have meaningful > busids rather than random numbers. Your entire argument seems to be > that its wrong because its a bit different and nobody else does it... If it's a trivial name then I think led_thinklight0 is perfectly okay, I think Kay was talking more about the attribute vs. name-in-device encoding. Richard. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
