From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 26 22:35:37 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AD3616A4CE
	for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2004 22:35:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lap.dougb.net (c-24-130-160-161.we.client2.attbi.com
	[24.130.160.161])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E422443D1D
	for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2004 22:35:36 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from DougB@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by lap.dougb.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i2R6Z7EU001067;
	Fri, 26 Mar 2004 22:35:13 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from DougB@FreeBSD.org)
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 22:35:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org>
To: Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <20040326122333.S61326@carver.gumbysoft.com>
Message-ID: <20040326223403.O984@ync.qbhto.arg>
References: <60523.24.0.61.35.1080081768.squirrel@webmail.linuxpowered.com>
	<20040326122333.S61326@carver.gumbysoft.com>
Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/
X-message-flag: Outlook -- Not just for spreading viruses anymore!
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>
cc: "current@freebsd.org" <current@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: userland|unprivileged file system handling tools
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 06:35:37 -0000

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, Doug White wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> > > As far as -current goes, mknod is not anything worth mentioning because of
> > > devfs.
> >
> > I disagree with this assessment. mknod is still useful in -current, for
> > instance in a chroot setup where you only need one or two devices.
>
> Like which? :-)

For example, the named chroot requires both a null and random device.

Doug

-- 

    This .signature sanitized for your protection