Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 23:59:58 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: julian@ref.tfs.com, pst@shockwave.com Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, phk@FreeBSD.org, tony@fit.qut.edu.au Subject: Re: Bug in NFS Message-ID: <199606191359.XAA19561@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> It was my understanding that no further development is going into devfs and >> that it's not ready for prime-time without symlinks and permission changes. >> Please tell me I'm wrong? > you are wrong.. > the following items need to be done in DEVSF > 1/ there is a problem in vnode allocation that canresult in crashes. > 2/ symlink support needs to be added.. it's kinda trivial, > but needs to be done > 3/ I think I want to add support for named pipes, as Iconsider them to be > "pseudo devices" and they are often made in /dev. > also not rocket science. also takes time... (what's that?) Er, this means he's right, except "further" should be "current". Development of devfs is stalled. I disagree with putting symlinks and especially named pipes in it. They would delay the deployment of a usable version and bloat the kernel. To support symlinks in /dev, fix union mounts or "union" file systems. Perhaps union mounts already work well enough for this limited application. I tried: # mkdir /tmp/z # ln -s /dev/zero /tmp/z/zz # mount -t null -o union /tmp/z /dev # ls -lF /dev/zz [...] /dev/zz@ -> /dev/zero # works # od /dev/zz [...] # works ^C # modstat [...] # even the lkm nullfs worked # umount /dev # I don't trust this :-) # modunload -i 0 # or this Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606191359.XAA19561>