[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: UUIDs (and devfs and major/minor numbers)
    Paul Jakma wrote:
    > > With devfsd, I have a very nice way of implementing persistence. I
    > can
    > > support the existing semantics, where a sysadmin goes in and manually
    > > changes things, and I already support a more powerful scheme where
    > > groups of device entries are "saved".
    > >
    > > Regards,
    > >
    > > Richard....
    > In other words, you can implement what traditional filesystems can do.
    > We know that. It also means devfs is superfluous. You might as well
    > have a devmgr process with no need for a devfs at all.
    > -hpa
    > oh come on....
    > a devmgr without kernel interaction would be a complicated, gross hack.
    > How would you handle dynamic devices with your devmgr? poll every second
    > for new devices? and what do you poll? Your devmgr has to get the
    > information about new/expired devices from somewhere - so the kernel has
    > to export this information somewhere. Why not in the most logical way:
    > directly to /dev?

    Trivially: it's the module installer's job. (Actually, dynamic devices
    are bad, this one of the major reasons why.)


    "The user's computer downloads the ActiveX code and simulates a 'Blue
    Screen' crash, a generally benign event most users are familiar with
    and that would not necessarily arouse suspicions."
    -- Security exploit description on

    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:0.023 / U:11.640 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site