From owner-freebsd-arch  Fri Nov  8 17:33:17 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E4DD637B401; Fri,  8 Nov 2002 17:33:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out017.verizon.net (out017pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.94])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 10BC443E7B; Fri,  8 Nov 2002 17:33:16 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from arlankfo@verizon.net)
Received: from verizon.net ([138.88.151.200]) by out017.verizon.net
          (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP
          id <20021109013315.QBRC3572.out017.verizon.net@verizon.net>;
          Fri, 8 Nov 2002 19:33:15 -0600
To: arch@freebsd.org
Cc: phk@freebsd.org
Subject: 
From: "Andrew Lankford" <arlankfo@141.com>
Reply-To: "Andrew Lankford" <arlankfo@141.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 20:33:44 -0500
Message-Id: <20021109013315.QBRC3572.out017.verizon.net@verizon.net>
Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-arch.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-arch>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-arch>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

>In message <20021108164651.6e839063.fearow@attbi.com>, Anti writes:
>>
>how are you supposed to get rid of devfs? 
>
>You're not.

Just out of curiosity, what's the main motivation for doing that?
Does UFS2 not support device nodes?  Or is it no longer possible to extricate
DEVFS code from the legacy code at compile time?  Would the average embedded
BSD user to notice any difference in memory usage?

I gather that the advantage of making GEOM standard will greatly reduce code
redundancy in the long run, but it's nice to be able to config out other major
OS components like INET6 and maybe even INET in some cases, even if support
for a no-"INET" config may inevitably "wither on the vine" in some future 
release, just like matcd and (god willing) floppy disks.  Incidently, the last
time I removed 'option INET' in my config was 2.2.2 (the dark ages).


Hope I'm not resurrecting a "bikeshed".  -CURRENT DEVFS works great,
and I look forward to using it in 5-STABLE.  But a '/etc/MAKEDEV all' on a
FFS partition still works as expected too.  And why shouldn't it?

Andrew Lankford


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