Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:27:24 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Hans Petter Selasky <hselasky@c2i.net> Cc: freebsd-usb@freebsd.org Subject: Re: usb4bsd patch review Message-ID: <10490.1219505244@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:34:53 %2B0200." <200808231034.54484.hselasky@c2i.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200808231034.54484.hselasky@c2i.net>, Hans Petter Selasky writes: >The problem about "devfs.rules" with regard to USB is that you don't know what >you are giving permissions to. A rule that gives permission to "/dev/ulpt0" >will give permissions to the first printer you plug into the USB system. That >is not neccessarily what the user wants. I think this might be a good time to consider the devd/devfs distribution of work. The reason devfs(8) works like "firewall rules" is that we did not want some mandatory daemon to set the modes, in particular on embedded systems. The alternative solution is to always create device nodes "root:wheel r--" and let the daemon set the mode as desired. This model has the advantage of not needing the uid, gid and mode arguments to make_dev, something that has always been acknowleded as a kludge. The down side is that devd(8) becomes a mandatory daemon on most systems. Given that devfs(8) has not exactly been a stellar success and that it often and repeatedly bites people with it slightly pedantic semantics, transitioning in that direction might be a good thing. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?10490.1219505244>