From owner-freebsd-current Mon Feb 12 11:59:55 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA23178 for current-outgoing; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 11:59:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [192.216.222.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA23172 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 11:59:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11]) by who.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.11) with ESMTP id LAA23282 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 11:59:41 -0800 Received: from sax.sax.de by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with ESMTP id UAA17625 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 20:57:53 +0100 Received: by sax.sax.de (8.6.11/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id UAA05422 for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 20:57:52 +0100 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.7.3/8.6.9) id TAA19448 for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 19:17:01 +0100 (MET) From: J Wunsch Message-Id: <199602121817.TAA19448@uriah.heep.sax.de> Subject: Re: FS PATCHES: THE NEXT GENERATION To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD-current users) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 19:17:00 +0100 (MET) Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) In-Reply-To: <19888.823871509@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Feb 9, 96 05:11:49 am X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > > hmm but devfs might be compulsory :) > > Erm.. I know you're probably joking, but since you bring it up. I > don't think that we should even ever consider making devfs mandatory > (optional is fine, I don't mind optional) until a persistance > mechanism that's fully transparent to the user is implemented. Despite of the dozens of other followups still sitting in my inbox (after only a three-day vacation...), just one point: Data General's DG/UX has just the sort of devfs as we have by now, their scenario seems to work fine for several years already. (Their devfs is creating generic device nodes, and the rc mechanism is linking them to ``short names''.) -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)