[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87tzd89oap.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:24:30 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: jassi_singh_brar@...oo.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: An idea .... with code
jassi brar <jassi_singh_brar@...oo.com> writes:
> Lately a question has been bugging me: Why do we keep complicated(specific ioctls to set up and set free)
Can you please expand a bit why you think losetup is that complicated
and what the problem is with it?
AFAIK you're essentially just moving a minimal version of losetup
(with missing features like no offsets etc.) into the kernel and
frankly I fail to see the beauty in that. Or rather if you start with
losetup, why stop at mount, modprobe, ifconfig, mkfs, fsck, ls[1], ...?
For me it seems more that most of the file system based command
interfaces (/proc/mtrr comes to mind) are quite hard to use and
I prefer a proper command line tool with a manpage and --help
and a real parser any day.
-Andi
[1] I'm sure someone could come up with some scheme to do ls using sysfs
and you could find someone on this list who said "cool" :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists