[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:0.021 / U:18.064 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site