From owner-freebsd-current  Sun May 31 00:10:40 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA16291
          for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sun, 31 May 1998 00:10:40 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from aldan.ziplink.net (mi@kot.ne.mediaone.net [24.128.29.55])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id AAA16279
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 31 May 1998 00:10:37 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from mi@rtfm.ziplink.net)
Received: from rtfm.ziplink.net (rtfm [199.232.255.52])
	by aldan.ziplink.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19636
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 31 May 1998 07:10:23 GMT
	(envelope-from mi@rtfm.ziplink.net)
Received: (from mi@localhost)
	by rtfm.ziplink.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) id DAA18304
	for current@freebsd.org; Sun, 31 May 1998 03:10:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com>
Message-Id: <199805310710.DAA18304@rtfm.ziplink.net>
Subject: Re: I see one major problem with DEVFS...
In-Reply-To: <199805310154.SAA08633@antipodes.cdrom.com> from "Mike Smith" at "May 30, 98 06:54:47 pm"
To: current@FreeBSD.ORG
Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 03:10:25 -0400 (EDT)
X-Face: 
	%UW#n0|w>ydeGt/b@1-.UFP=K^~-:0f#O:D7w<gv/&E-lL7twZCT8B~/PA4|\t$ti+22K">
		 hJ5G_<5143Bb3kOIs9XpX+"V+~$adGP:J|SLieM31VIhqXeLBli"<kcG^EOVih
		 y+z3/UR{6SCQ
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL39 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Mike Smith once stated:

=> May be this should be the semantics of `rm' on the DEVFS?
=> Removal of the driver, or telling it to stop driving a
=> particular device? (If possible, otherwise, rm fails?) mknod
=> (or, `touch'!!) can then be used to load the driver back (if
=> possible).

=Not useful. You want to poke a single entity (the driver) and
=have it remove all it's nodes, rather than have to guess at all
=the nodes everywhere that it might own and run around deleting
=them all.

Not necessarily. By removing /dev/lpt1 I may be telling the
lpt driver to stop driving the second lport, but the lpt0 may
continue to work.

There are plenty of possible interpretations of rm in this case,
I wonder if any other OS has DEVFS already and how do they deal
with this...

	-mi

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message