Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 6 Jan 1998 20:45:00 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: PROPOSAL: /proc/dev |
| |
Kevin Lentin writes: > On Mon, Jan 05, 1998 at 12:22:15PM -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote: > > One feature of devfs is that it gets rid of major and minor numbers. > > In some other way, /dev/foo gets associated with the foo driver. > > > > Hmmm, perhaps this advantage could be separated out and made to work > > with the existing system. A new major number of "auto-resolve" would > > cause the kernel to resolve the filename to a device driver. I don't > > know if this is a feasible idea or not. > > One side effect of all this is that /dev/cdrom will _have_ to be a symlink > now. Device naming policy is now a kernel issue and no longer an admin > issue.
Probably a good thing as it allows driver writers to enforce a known standard interface name.
> A second point. More a question. Under the new devfs scheme can I put > devices in other parts of the filesystem? If there are no major/minor > numbers, can I create a device file called 'core' that is really /dev/null > (without using a symlink)? Sure, symlinks work almost all of the time but > there are cases where you might want a device somewhere else.
Nope: if CONFIG_DEVFS is enabled then drivers can only be accessed through devfs and symlinks to devfs.
Regards,
Richard....
| |