Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:02:17 -0800 (AKDT) From: Mel <mel.xyzzy@rachie.is-a-geek.net> To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: docs/117308: Clarification of /etc/defaults/devfs.rules status Message-ID: <20071018180217.6B02D1CEB7@snoogles.rachie.is-a-geek.net> Resent-Message-ID: <200710181820.l9IIK2O2085458@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Number: 117308 >Category: docs >Synopsis: Clarification of /etc/defaults/devfs.rules status >Confidential: no >Severity: non-critical >Priority: medium >Responsible: freebsd-doc >State: open >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: doc-bug >Submitter-Id: current-users >Arrival-Date: Thu Oct 18 18:20:02 UTC 2007 >Closed-Date: >Last-Modified: >Originator: Mel >Release: FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE i386 >Organization: >Environment: System: FreeBSD snoogles.rachie.is-a-geek.net 6.2-STABLE FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE #0: Mon Mar 26 09:16:30 AKDT 2007 root@smoochies.rachie.is-a-geek.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 >Description: After reading devfs(8), rc.conf(5) and devfs.rules(5) and some scanning of /etc/rc.d/* it's still unclear what the status of /etc/defaults/devfs.rules is, once one creates /etc/devfs.rules. Meaning: are they merged and are same-name or same-number overridden by /etc/devfs.rules or is /etc/defaults/devfs.rules complete ignored if an /etc/devfs.rules is detected. Or is /etc/defaults/devfs.rules always loaded and should the sysadmin avoid name/number clashes? >How-To-Repeat: N.A. >Fix: >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: >Unformatted:
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071018180217.6B02D1CEB7>