[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:0.146 / U:1.936 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site