On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 01:53:55AM +0100, Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > > [big snip] > > All the people wanting to bring up the udev vs. devfs argument go back > > and read the previous paragraph. Yes, all Gentoo users who keep filling > > up my inbox with smoking emails, I mean you. > [yet another big snip] > > Hihi, life is unfair to you. ;-) I am one of those nasty gentoo users > and still use devfs, but I want to switch asap, as I found a thread in > gentoo forums about it and furthermore tend to do experiments with my > installation. So not all gentoo users are bad users. ;-) I really > appreciate your work and hope you will find more time in developing udev > instead of wasting time (though it was quite interesting for me to read > your text) with arguing for it. So I hope when I do the transition it > goes smoothly, but even if not, I won't bash onto your head. ;-) Thanks, I have gotten a lot of response to this message from Gentoo users appologizing for the "bad seeds". By no means did I mean to disparage all Gentoo users, just the ones that keep bothering me with this pointless argument. In fact, now that I know Gentoo works without devfs, I'm considering putting it on an old laptop I have around here... thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.0 - Watchdog patches (BK consistency checks)
- Next by Date: Re: 2.6.0: alsa, esd, mpg123
- Previous by thread: Re: BUG in x86 do_page_fault? [was Re: in_atomic doesn't countlocal_irq_disable?]
- Next by thread: Re: udev and devfs - The final word
- Indexes:[Main][Thread]