Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 11 Jan 1998 11:44:32 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: PROPOSAL: /proc/dev |
| |
C. Scott Ananian writes: > On Sat, 10 Jan 1998 Richard Gooch <rgooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU> wrote: > > > Theodore Y. Ts'o writes: > > [...] > > > I thought you said devfs would be compatible with people who need to > > > create a subset of /dev with character and block devices in (say) > > > /u1/ftp/dev for the purpose of creating chroot'ed jail.... > > > Er, I don't think there is a problem. > [...] > > Installation during the transition phase > > ======================================== > > > > Currently, not all device drivers in the kernel have been modified to > > use devfs. To allow booting of kernels with and without devfs support, > > you will want to copy the contents of /dev to /olddev. Then, remove > > entries in /dev which are now available in devfs and make them > > symbolic links to the entries in /olddev. > > Finally, edit your /etc/fstab or boot scripts so that devfs is mounted > > over /olddev on bootup. If devfs is supported, accessing devices > > supported by devfs will follow the symlinks to devfs. If devfs is not > > supported, accessing those same devices will follow the symlinks to > > /olddev which contains only old-style device nodes. > > Devices not supported by devfs will be found directly on /dev. > > Simple! You can also follow this principle for chroot gaols. > > Well, it doesn't sound so simple, but I'll take your word for it. > I assume that this means that I can make a chroot jail using *only* > old-style dev entries (forgoing the new-fangled devfs) if I like? > If not, why not?
Drivers not converted to support devfs will require ordinary device nodes. Those nodes may reside on a devfs just like on any other FS. Does that answer your question?
Regards,
Richard....
| |