[cgl_discussion] RE: MV open projects analysis

Rusty Lynch rusty at linux.co.intel.com
Tue Jun 24 14:17:33 PDT 2003


On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 14:16, Patrick Mochel wrote:
> 
> Hi there.
> 
> > PDF is updated too at:
> > http://www.osdl.org/docs/cgl_20_p1_project_list___pdf_format.pdf.
> 
> A couple of points on the "Hot Device Identity" Requirement, from a 2.5 
> developer standpoint.
> 
> udev, and associated sysfs utilities, are intended to become the de facto
> standard for supporting persistant device data, including naming. There is
> a lot of work going on in this area, though more is greatly welcome (hint, 
> hint ;).
> 
> It does currently only work for a subset of devices, but that is not a
> long-term limitation. As more device subsystems are converted to the 2.5 
> driver model, more subsystems will be supported by udev. Some patches are 
> pending (e.g. input devices), and more are yet come.
> 
> As for MontaVista's SDEF utility, I strongly suggest you reconsider it's
> entry in the spreadsheet. First of all, the intent of the work is
> completely unaligned with the short-term and long-term goals of the
> relevant kernel developers, and is not supported at all by said parties.  
> While it may suffice as a solution for 2.4-based distribution, it will be
> made irrelevant by udev and friends in the 2.6 time frame. 
> 
> Secondly, it's vaporware. It has not been released, and there is no
> guarantee that it will be. It is shamelessly self-promoting, and in poor
> taste, IMO. No where else in the document are entries for ficticious
> projects. I suggest removing it for the sake of consistency and honesty.
> 
> 
> 	-pat
> 

My understanding was that Monta Vista's new implementation was built on
top of udev.  Am I mistaken?

    --rustyl




More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list