From owner-freebsd-current Wed Aug 15 17:17:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E502C37B40E for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:17:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: by wantadilla.lemis.com (Postfix, from userid 1004) id D60106ACBC; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:47:35 +0930 (CST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:47:35 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: Poul-Henning Kamp Cc: Julian Elischer , Andrew Kenneth Milton , Michael Lucas , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: devfs deficiencies (was: devfs and Vinum (was: any -current && vinum problems?)) Message-ID: <20010816094735.F49989@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <83740.997895867@critter> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <83740.997895867@critter>; from phk@critter.freebsd.dk on Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 07:17:47PM +0200 Organization: The FreeBSD Project Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF 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 On Wednesday, 15 August 2001 at 19:17:47 +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message , Ju > lian Elischer writes: > >> the lack of subdirectory support is a pitty. > > There is support for subdirectories: > > ls -la /dev/fd What am I supposed to see there? I get three character devices, all mounted on /dev directly. In any case, what devfs has is support for names with / in them. It violates POLA and causes serious problems in third party software. I think that you should implement subdirectories. >> it was a primary design goal in the previous devfs and its >> disappearance caught me by surprise. (the support I mean) > > > The ability to not panic left, right and centre was a primary > design goal of this devfs and its absense in the previos devfs > caught be by surprise. (The lack of support as well). > In view of the fact that this thread is about deficiencies in your devfs, this is particularly uncalled for. One of the reasons that Julian's devfs never got debugged was that you had made it very clear from the start that it would be removed. And in general, can we stop the high incidence of mud-slinging we've seen on the lists lately? Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message