Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 16:10:05 -0800 From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: julian@ref.tfs.com (JULIAN Elischer), scrappy@ki.net, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DEVFS vs "regular /dev" Message-ID: <199603210010.QAA03902@Root.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 20 Mar 1996 15:33:17 MST." <199603202233.PAA27947@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> > This assumes that the file system abstractions currently in place >> > change as well, since the /dev FS can't be mounted *after* the / FS >> > has been mounted as an inferior FS -- >> why not? >> you don't need a mounted /dev to mount root. >> that's done specially. > >So you don't need a mounted root to have a mounted /dev, of course! That's silly. The root filesystem is mounted long before /dev would be, and as Julian points out, /dev is not required for this (in the same way that /dev is not required when it is disk resident - you'd have a chicken and egg problem as /dev *is* on the root filesystem). >This makes it possible to remount root r/w without unmounting the >devfs (and so still needing /dev). Remounting r/w is not precluded by having /dev mounted (or any other filesystem). Remonting r/w involves changing mount flags, nothing more. -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603210010.QAA03902>