From owner-freebsd-current Tue Feb 17 13:19:37 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA23033 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Tue, 17 Feb 1998 13:19:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [195.8.129.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA23009 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 1998 13:19:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost.cybercity.dk [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA05081; Tue, 17 Feb 1998 22:13:38 +0100 (CET) To: shimon@simon-shapiro.org cc: Julian Elischer , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: devfs persistence In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 17 Feb 1998 13:11:16 PST." Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 22:13:36 +0100 Message-ID: <5079.887750016@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message , Simon Shapiro writes >>> So, if I create a file /etc/devfs.conf with something like : >>> >>> # Sample /etc/devfs.conf >>> >> [stuff removed] >> >> yes > >So, where is the problem? I see that you can have a simple, pure DEVFS, >and a silly shell script can provide persistance and a user can still shoot >him/herself in the foot. So all the Unix requirements are met (simple, >script modifyable, and self-destructable :-). > >I say, go for it. Amen... -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." "Drink MONO-tonic, it goes down but it will NEVER come back up!" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message