Renaming of devices in 2.6.31

Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at
Mon Nov 23 02:58:20 CET 2009

On 23.11.2009 02:17, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> Mike Westerhof wrote:
> > Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> >> Mike Westerhof wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This is all quite ridiculous -- so in addition to having to
> >>> know the underlying machine (gta01 vs gta02), now userspace has
> >>> to know what kernel version?  So all userspace apps now have to
> >>> have a huge nested case structure to select the correct sysfs
> >>> interface, based on the machine and the kernel version as well.
> >>>
> >> The second person who apparently missed pattern... "*::vibrator"
> > Not missed at all -- a) that is a but a single example, and in the
> > general case it doesn't scale, and b) it still results in
> > user-space needing to be changed to work with the new kernel, for
> > no reason other than kernel "pretty-ness".
> Oh boy... If your distro wants to ship 2.6.31 then it should add an
> initscript creating a softlink.

Did you know that Linus himself has declared that kernel upgrades should
not break userspace regardless of how twisted, buggy or crappy the
userspace is? Even if the userspace in question relies on an
undocumented kernel bug, fixing that kernel bug has to happen in a way
that won't break userspace assumptions. LKML archives have the flamewar
from a few weeks ago in all its beauty. A few other mails from Linus
(different threads, much older) state that a kernel upgrade should not
break an installed distribution.

Just FYI.

Developer quote of the month:
"We are juggling too many chainsaws and flaming arrows and tigers."

More information about the openmoko-kernel mailing list