[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:0.088 / U:1.144 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site