[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Location of shmfs; devfs automagics
    H. Peter Anvin writes:
    > Followup to: <>
    > By author: Richard Gooch <>
    > In newsgroup:
    > >
    > > The problem has been one of time. I've spent the last few weeks first
    > > at a conference, then travelling, then came back and promptly caught
    > > the flu (misery for a week). And then bring my main machine up to date
    > > after an extended absence. So soon I should be able to start tackling
    > > that mountain of devfs email I've got in my inbox :-( Oh. And I need
    > > to write a better HOWTO :-(
    > >
    > > I need a clone.
    > Don't we all. By the way, Richard... please don't take this the
    > wrong way. I do, however, think that it would be a major win to
    > make devfs behave as a standard good citizen, *especially* given the
    > reliance on devfsd.

    Yeah, I understand where you're coming from. But the current behaviour
    isn't really causing a problem (there is a config option and boot
    option), and there *were* good reasons to do it the way I did. Like I
    said, I'd have to dig into my archives (and they are *big*) to extract
    all the reasons. It wasn't just one.

    I haven't had time today to respond further to this thread, but just
    consider this point. If you boot with "devfs=only", then you *have* to
    mount devfs before init/main:init() opens /dev/console. And booting
    with "devfs=only" is legitimate.



    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 13:57    [W:0.019 / U:2.288 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site