Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 12:55:19 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Cc: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, "Niels Chr. Bank-Pedersen" <ncbp@bank-pedersen.dk>, current@FreeBSD.ORG, Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> Subject: Re: how's vinum these days with DEVFS (second part) Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0103111253310.29879-100000@zeppo.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <xzpelw4hvxy.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> writes: > > Hmm. Sounds to me more like an argument for requiring devfs if you > > use vinum. > > Not until vinum works equally well with devfs as without it. Har har har har har............ Almost a Catch-22... "We have to do really wierd things so vinum will work equally well without devfs as with it... so we can, then,.... remove all the wierd things we did to make vinum work equally well without devfs as with it"... I think what you really meant to say was "No, we won't require devfs". To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.21.0103111253310.29879-100000>