> You see, Richard, there is a tiny problem. Many people will _really_ want
> to configure DEVFS out of their kernels. Procfs is much more conservative
> wrt dcache...
Procfs adds 90K to the running footprint of my machine, so I want to run it
as a loadable module using old style /dev when building embedded boxes.
The real disk /dev is the right answer for small machines along with
sysctl without proc.
Devfs looks after the big machine issues better.
Procfs is to a great extent the wrong answer to most of its uses, its more
bloated than sysctl but does little more and its slow.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 17 2000 - 09:23:58 EST