Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 30 Jun 2005 15:13:54 +0200
From:      Marco Molteni <mmolteni@cisco.com>
To:        Mike Makonnen <mtm@identd.net>
Cc:        Matteo Riondato <matteo@freebsd.org>, edwin@mavetju.org, freebsd-rc@freebsd.org, bug-followup@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: kern/63954: devfs loses permissions
Message-ID:  <200506301513.55718.mmolteni@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050630090855.GA1372@rogue.smit.lan>
References:  <20050615162744.GP1053@kaiser.sig11.org> <20050629164550.GJ7953@kaiser.sig11.org> <20050630090855.GA1372@rogue.smit.lan>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 30 June 2005 11:08, Mike Makonnen wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 06:45:50PM +0200, Matteo Riondato wrote:
> > Then having any other kind of rule in devfs.conf should is kind of
> > useless, at least for devices that can "disappear", since rules
> > referring to them will not be added do the devfs ruleset, and this
> > implies that one have to rerun /etc/rc.d/devfs after reinserting
> > the pcmcia nic or after launching tcpdump or whatever.
>
> Just to make it clear: devfs.rules is the correct way to do what you
> and the original poster wants. Once the rules have been applied it
> doesn't matter if the device is or isn't in /dev, whether you remove
> it or plug it in later. Once you run rc.d/devfs you don't have to
> rerun it again unless you add/change/remove the rules.

Mike,

Matteo was referring to devfs.conf, not devfs.rules.

devfs.conf should die, it is there to confuse people.

marco



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200506301513.55718.mmolteni>