Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 19:46:06 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@plutotech.com> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DEVFS, the time has come... Message-ID: <7044.915302766@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 02 Jan 1999 00:57:32 MST." <199901020805.BAA19906@pluto.plutotech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199901020805.BAA19906@pluto.plutotech.com>, "Justin T. Gibbs" writes: >> One of the major proponents of a persistent DEVFS was Justin, last >> time we've been talking about it. It seems Justin's opinion is now >> also to put all this out to userland, into something like a devfsd. > > I've always felt that much of the machinery of a persistent DEVFS > should reside in userland, but that we'd be hard pressed to properly > support a dynamic and secure system without persistence. Justin, would you mind clairfying that last concern ? (This is what this thread is about, not about implementation details, which there are NO reason to haggle about at this time, so please stop wasting our time. This is about persistence or non-persistence, not about how chroot /devs get mounted or with which options.) [I feel that it is difficult to get a 'handle' on which problems there are with persistence or lack thereof without having reasonably clear ideas of how it will be implemented, so I'm letting some messages on this through. However, try to keep your comments closely related to the issue of whether persistence in and of itself is required. -EE] -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." "ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7044.915302766>