From owner-freebsd-current Sat Feb 21 11:22:14 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA03239 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 21 Feb 1998 11:22:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from narnia.plutotech.com (narnia.plutotech.com [206.168.67.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA03230 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 1998 11:22:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gibbs@narnia.plutotech.com) Received: (from gibbs@localhost) by narnia.plutotech.com (8.8.8/8.7.3) id MAA03325; Sat, 21 Feb 1998 12:19:14 -0700 (MST) Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 12:19:14 -0700 (MST) From: "Justin T. Gibbs" Message-Id: <199802211919.MAA03325@narnia.plutotech.com> To: Terry Lambert cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: devfs persistence Newsgroups: pluto.freebsd.current In-Reply-To: <199802172325.QAA07146@usr09.primenet.com> User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-971204 (UNIX) (FreeBSD/3.0-CURRENT (i386)) Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I would argue for build-time, and let you edit the class template > data if you felt inclined to do it post-build. But I'm just being > generous; there's no real reason for allowing that, especially in a > first revision, since you always have rc.local. I don't think that class templates are generic enough. When I worked for TCS at Cal Berkely, we had a machine that had everything but one public tape drive locked in a cabinet. The system had one tape drive for nightly dumps that only the sysadmins could access with a key. So, as you can imagine, the permissions on the two devices were quite different even though they were members of the same class. > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org -- Justin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message