Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Aug 1998 20:06:25 -0400 | From | "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <> | Subject | Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???) |
| |
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 07:41:46 +1000 (EST) From: Nathan Hand <nathanh@chirp.com.au>
I like this suggestion. It opens the door to having an /etc/dev.conf with permissions, ACLs, post-scripts, user-defined naming schemes (I think that would solve most people's problems immediately :-).
But isn't this remarkably similar to the kerneld idea?
The big difference is that kernel code had to block waiting for kerneld to do something. In this case, the kernel code merely has to post a notification to the daemon that a new device exists, and it doesn't have to wait for the daemon to do something about it.
The only issue is that you then lose /dev on filesystems which don't support UNIX nodes (ie devfs on ms-dos partitions). Though there are other ways of achieving the same effect, so it's no big loss.
That's what the umsdos filesystem is for....
- Ted
- 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
| |