lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: DevFS vs. normal /dev (was DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???))
On Tue, 11 Aug 1998, Michael H. Warfield wrote:

> Gee... This is begining to sound more and more like the way
> Solaris does dynamic devices with their "/devices" directory being
> built from driver information and tons and tons of symlinks from the
> /dev directory to the real devices in the /devices directory. Works
> great, as long as everything works right. :-( When something gets
> screwy you can boot the system back up with a "-r" option to rebuild
> the devices area. Don't know how much all those symlinks add to the
> reputation of "Slowlaris" though. If that's the road we are starting
> to walk down, I stick with the old style /dev directory and mknod,
> thank you.

What will it hurt to just try it???

> They're actually not using an idea like devfs but are using
> configuration files for all of their drivers. They then use the
> drivers and the configuration files during a rebuild to autobuild
> the /devices directory. That can be triggered by either new hardware
> or the -r option to the boot command. Having done device drivers
> for SunOS 4.x and Solaris (SunOS 5.x), sometimes I think they ended
> up with the worst of both possible worlds when they did that.

I think your view is just a little warped by not having used it. I'm not
a "POD PERSON", I am not under some mind control device Richard has
implanted. Just try it, the first one's free! (hehehe)

> That's also why I'm somewhat sceptical about devfs. While it
> may well be very useful for some things, I can see trouble in practice
> and I doubt it will ever totally replace the normal /dev directory.
> But it's also very hard to predict where the problems will be until
> it gets more use, so I'm interested in seeing it in the kernel as an
> option (but hey - I was for seeing Solar Designers security patches
> in the kernel and that got nowhere after a very similar religious
> debate). I could be wrong, but I suspect devil's in those details...

Noone is suggesting that this be done. We just want to have it as a REAL
option for users to try at will, and I've seen more dangerous and less
stable features added to developement kernels...

-Shawn
<=========== America Held Hostage ===========>
Day 2029 for the poor and the middle class.
Day 2048 for the rich and the dead.
893 days remaining in the Raw Deal.
<============================================>


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:43    [W:0.338 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site