[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectDevfs, was Re: Migrating to larger numbers
On Tue, 8 Jun 1999, Alan Cox wrote:

> but if you're using devfs why would you ever need to do the above? Devfs

You dont have any choice. NFS says "it happens".

> No need to mount /dev over nfs anymore.

You have to handle NFSv3 serving to non Linux clients. And as I said the
obvious approach is to lie and claim to be using 12:20

i think we're mixing up the pov of /dev/ for the server and then for
the client in the same argument.

for a linux client with devfs, it doesn't need to nfs mount any /dev,
it's builtin like /proc. a server can export a standard filesystem
type /dev over nfs to clients, irregardless of what kind of /dev it's

So where's the problem? Also, AFAIK, the split thing is transparent
to devfs. (maybe richard can confirm this).

devfs is a good thing. I and all the rest who have tried it and use
it regularly think so. It's compatible, it's clean, it eliminates
/dev admin maintenance. And it works really well.

When will it be included? And if there are problems to it's
inclusion, what are they, so that a solution can be found.

Paul Jakma
PGP5 key:
The first 90% of a project takes 90% of the time, the last 10% takes the
other 90% of the time.

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 13:52    [W:0.073 / U:0.868 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site