From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 4 17:09:23 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B37616A408; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 17:09:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from pi.codefab.com (pi.codefab.com [199.103.21.227]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1622E13C46A; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 17:09:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pi.codefab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14A9A5D65; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 12:48:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at codefab.com Received: from pi.codefab.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pi.codefab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kKvchYvDpBa0; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 12:48:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.3] (pool-68-161-116-136.ny325.east.verizon.net [68.161.116.136]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pi.codefab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CFD95D00; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 12:48:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4613D6F3.4080701@mac.com> Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 12:48:51 -0400 From: Chuck Swiger User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Pantyukhin References: <46128475.9060602@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: Surviving /dev/null disappearance X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 17:09:23 -0000 Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: > On 4/3/07, Maxim Sobolev wrote: >> Patch ld(1) to detect the condition and don't unlink the device node? > > Yes, but there has to be a generic solution, so that > we don't reinvent the wheel for every one of the > thousands apps that may do this. > > Isn't there some safety-net wrapper function that > refuses to remove device nodes and maybe some other > types of files? Why not set a filesystem flag like schg on device nodes under a devfs tree...? -- -Chuck