Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 00:54:25 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: I see one major problem with DEVFS... Message-ID: <4005.896514865@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 29 May 1998 23:26:48 PDT." <199805300626.XAA01190@antipodes.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Because it ain't mounted anyhere. Think: user says: > > # rm /dev/foo0 > <expletive> > # mknod /dev/foo0 c ??? > > What are they going to supply for the dev_t? The numbers are dynamic, > so there's no possible reference to them. Even if they weren't, > there's no guarantee they'd be able to guess them anyway. 1. Of course the numbers aren't dynamic - for backwards-compatibility to even begin to work at the mknod-level, you'd have to preserve the old assignments. 2. The mknod operation may be done by something like sysinstall or even the old MAKEDEV script - the user doesn't necessarily have to know, it just needs to work even if the script is creating some custom set of aliases, like "/dev/floppy" or "/dev/cdrom", etc. That's why I'm sticking so stubbornly to the idea of preserving any residual meaning for major/minors at all. :) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4005.896514865>