Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 19 Apr 1995 09:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@ref.tfs.com>
To:        davidg@Root.COM
Cc:        bde@zeta.org.au, julian@ref.tfs.com, hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: [DEVFS] your opinions sought!
Message-ID:  <199504191649.JAA09052@ref.tfs.com>
In-Reply-To: <199504191017.DAA00268@corbin.Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at Apr 19, 95 03:17:04 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >>I personally have always prefered the flat scheme of /dev (with possible
> >>exceptions for /dev/fd/*).  This is a religious issue, I have spoken my
> >>religion.
> >
> >I like it fairly flat.  There certainly shouldn't be subdirectories for
> >pieces of one device.
> 
>    I agree with Bruce. I would have agreed with Rod, but the simple fact is
> that our /dev directory is getting very large and bloated, and this will only
> get worse. Perhaps /dev/disks/* and /dev/ttys/*, etc, might be a way to
> organize things (in other words, by device class). I prefer to not minimize
> the number of levels as much as possible, while still providing some
> organization.

I vote for this one too.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@login.dknet.dk> -- TRW Financial Systems, Inc.
'All relevant people are pertinent' && 'All rude people are impertinent'
=> 'no rude people are relevant'



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504191649.JAA09052>