From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Apr 29 14:52:12 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA17976
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 14:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA17970
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 14:52:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id HAA01543; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 07:50:25 +1000
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 07:50:25 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199604292150.HAA01543@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: hackers@FreeBSD.org, julian@ref.tfs.com
Subject: Re: devfs policy question.
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

[(1)]
>what should happen to the vnode for /devfs/rsd1s1d if the slice code
>decides that that device makes no sense any more, but there is a reference
>because a preocess somewhere has it open.. (what if it's mounted?)?

>At the moment a vgone() is done on the vnode.
>is this right?

This is harder to get right while both /dev and /devfs exist.  It certainly
isn't right if the vnode was opened in /dev.

>Policy question number two
>should devfs allow the creation of fifo/named pipes?
>I tend to think yes.... they are dynamic and kinda-like devices

No.  Named pipes are static...

Bruce