From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 13:30:23 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [RFC 0/6] mdev-only /dev management (without devtmpfs) In-Reply-To: <55EFFB42.2050106@mind.be> References: <1441747734-18730-1-git-send-email-luca@lucaceresoli.net> <55EFFB42.2050106@mind.be> Message-ID: <20150909133023.005a8364@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 11:26:26 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > On 08-09-15 23:28, Luca Ceresoli wrote: > > There is one rough edge that I'd like to have comments about: variable > > naming. The new method implemented by this patchset is dynamic and uses > > mdev, so it should ba named BR2_ROOTFS_DEVICE_CREATION_DYNAMIC_MDEV and > > described in kconfig as "dynamic using mdev". But hey, that name and > > description are already used for the current "devtmpfs + mdev" method! So > > we might want to rename all variables to encompass the new use case in a > > clean way. Thid would also imply lagacy management etc. > > Since we don't like legacy management :-) I'd propose to say that DYNAMIC > actually means DEVTMPFS. So the new option would be called > BR2_ROOTFS_DEVICE_CREATION_MDEV: it's not devtmpfs, and there's no need for the > explicit 'only' part. > > What do you think? I agree. I would prefer to not change the name of existing options. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com