was: mark obsolete usage of fold - now: kill devfsd

Rob Landley rob at landley.net
Sun Dec 11 18:35:42 UTC 2005

On Sunday 11 December 2005 07:04, Tito wrote:
> On Sunday 11 December 2005 11:05, Rob Landley wrote:
> > (I realise this conflicts with my position that devfsd is evil and should
> > die. The truth is, devfsd is intrusive (breaking stuff like losetup when
> > people do allyesconfig and accidentally enable it), never worked
> > properly, and something I actively don't want to maintain.  If Tito steps
> > up to defend it, and is passionate about it and wants to maintain it I'll
> > probably back down on that one.  But allyesconfig still shouldn't select
> > it, because it breaks stuff.)
> Hi,
> I don't think to defend it nor to maintain it as my ubuntu box
> doesn't use it and I have no way to test it.
> The last fixes were done blindly and i can't say if
> I broke something, but as nobody complained about them
> .....probably nobody use it.

I mentioned you because I searched through the AUTHORS file for the 
maintainer, and didn't want to say "if $MAINTAINER stands up for it" without 
checking if we actually had one I'd ever heard of...

> BTW: it will be ripped out from the kernel soon,

More or less already was.

> so maybe we should do the same:
> 1) Remove it from the make *config system at first
>      so that I could be used only by editing .config and bb_config.h
>      manually.
> 2) Wait if somebody cries.....
> 3) Remove it (maybe in 1.2)

If we're going to yank it, just yank it.  (It isn't threaded through our code 
at _nearly_ the level it is in the kernel, so putting it back if a maintainer 
stood up and made a truly compelling case for keeping it isn't brain 

Yeah, 1.2 sounds about right.

> Ciao,
> Tito

Steve Ballmer: Innovation!  Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.

More information about the busybox mailing list