[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)
On Thu, 6 Aug 1998, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:

> No, but certain devfs "cheerleaders" have been responsible for at least

Rah Rah!!!

> Precisely. In Unix we have a very well developed abstraction for saving
> this kind of state: permissions, user/group ownership, modtimes, etc.
> It's called a filesystem. Tar is an unmitigated hack; using a C program
> helps hide the fact that what you're doing is a hack, but it's still a
> hack.

One with millions of inodes even with btree will be slow. I've
benchmarked reiserfs, have you???

> Going to 32-bit device numbers can be easily done during Linux 2.3; the
> glibc interface already supports it. We know where to store the 32-bit
> device in the ext2 filesystem, and how to do so in a backwards
> compatible way; we have abstractions in place that should make it more
> or less painless to go to using 32-bit device numbers. It's a mere
> matter of programming, and it isn't a lot of programming at that.

Ok, you want a fully populated /dev? Fine, be that way. I would
appreciate an *OPTION* to configure in the DEVFS without dl'ing a patch.

<=========== America Held Hostage ===========>
Day 2024 for the poor and the middle class.
Day 2043 for the rich and the dead.
898 days remaining in the Raw Deal.

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 13:43    [W:0.181 / U:1.996 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site