Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 09:25:24 +0000 From: Freminlins <freminlins@gmail.com> To: "Kris Kennaway" <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mknod, devfs and FreeBSD Message-ID: <eeef1a4c0701300125n2056eb19m180b7389f1638d71@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20070129142029.GA45960@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <eeef1a4c0701260840pef414f9h3e76fce789c06386@mail.gmail.com> <20070126174826.GA13730@xor.obsecurity.org> <eeef1a4c0701261505g7258ae9cx7bcb70a825fb8c88@mail.gmail.com> <20070126234756.GA19420@xor.obsecurity.org> <eeef1a4c0701280756m3014f3acu15398d43e7a309e2@mail.gmail.com> <20070128184925.GB61662@xor.obsecurity.org> <eeef1a4c0701290507n1aa08ebby380cc688f23ed09e@mail.gmail.com> <20070129142029.GA45960@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris, On 29/01/07, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > > > To put it bluntly, it's something you're just going to have to get > over :-) That's unhelpful. It is, in my opinion, a bad idea to have to mount up 1400 instances of devfs just to get a few device nodes. It just doesn't seem right. It's a kludge. What I will do instread is migrate the box to Solaris where I can do what I want to do. It's a poor argument to say basically "that's the way it is". I have always found FreeBSD to be flexible, not restrictive. If devfs is the only way to go, why does mknod still exist? Why does it allow me to create device nodes that don't work? Kris Frem.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?eeef1a4c0701300125n2056eb19m180b7389f1638d71>