[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: UUIDs (and devfs and major/minor numbers)
    Disclaimer: I haven't looked at the actual devfs code, but considering
    that there must have been one longish linux-kernel thread carefully
    dissecting every single line of it by now, I've worked up enough
    confidence to voice my opinion anyway ;-)

    Richard Gooch wrote:
    > Theodore Y. Ts'o writes:
    >> Well, no, that doesn't work, since there plenty of non-process stuff
    >> which doesn't fit into a devfs mounted in /dev.
    > Such as?

    /proc/mounts ?

    > Explain to me how this is different from mounting devfs onto /kernel
    > and using devfsd to populate a disc-based /dev.

    I think Ted disagrees with devfs making choices like lumping all the,
    say, IDE CD drivers together, instead of separating them by IDE bus.
    I guess the real question is whether classifying things by their
    purpose (e.g. "disk") instead of their attachment (e.g. ide0/master or
    isa/busmouse) adds any significant complexity or ambiguity. I think in
    almost every case the classification is already done elsewhere, so it
    probably isn't too much of a problem.

    > But this is a straw-man argument, because it ignores the persistence
    > problem with a dynamic disc-based /dev which is managed with a user
    > space daemon. This is a problem that's been overlooked.

    Actually, with devfsd, wouldn't it be easier to have a configuration
    file with a set of rules, a bit like what /dev/MAKEDEV has, but perhaps
    more like a set of chmods executed in sequence, so that you can have
    layered defaults ? E.g.

    perm root sys 600 * */* */*/*
    perm root sys 666 null zero full
    perm root disk 660 */disk/*

    Then simply refuse any direct chown/chmod by the user. Once people are
    used to it, they may actually like it better.

    Sorry if I'm re-iterating some thread long ago burried.

    > Again I'll ask the question I've already asked a number of times. How
    > would you cleanly support a construct like this:
    > opendir ("/dev/ide/cd");
    > loop;

    Although you bring this up in almost every posting in devfs, I'm not so
    sure if this is really an essential feature. It's nice, though.

    - Werner

    / Werner Almesberger, ICA, EPFL, CH /

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.024 / U:91.204 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site