From owner-freebsd-current Tue Nov 5 11:41:49 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 361EF37B401 for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2002 11:41:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B13B043E3B for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2002 11:41:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) id gA5Jfk4v089205; Tue, 5 Nov 2002 13:41:46 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dan) Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 13:41:46 -0600 From: Dan Nelson To: Dima Dorfman Cc: Andrew Lankford , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: What's the status of devfs(8)? Message-ID: <20021105194146.GB35777@dan.emsphone.com> References: <20021105044708.LIEA1469.out010.verizon.net@verizon.net> <20021105185757.GB641@trit.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021105185757.GB641@trit.org> X-OS: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT X-message-flag: Outlook Error User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In the last episode (Nov 05), Dima Dorfman said: > Andrew Lankford wrote: > > When I try commands like: > > > > #devfs rule add path speaker mode 666 > > Did you set a ruleset before this? > > devfs ruleset 10 > > > devfs rule: ioctl DEVFSIO_RADD: Input/output error > > This is telling you that you're trying to modify ruleset 0. From the > man page: > > Ruleset number 0 is the default ruleset for all new > mount-points. It is always empty, cannot be modified or > deleted, and does not show up in the output of showsets. Then it should return EPERM, EACCESS, EINVAL, or basically anything except EIO, imho. I got bit by this as well, and thought /sbin/devfs was simply broken or not fully coded until I saw this post. Or maybe allow ruleset 0 to be modified like any other? Is there a benefit to having an invisible, immutable default ruleset? -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message