Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 18:50:19 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: des@flood.ping.uio.no (Dag-Erling Smorgrav) Cc: phk@critter.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp), chris@calldei.com, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposal: Union mount of fdesc on top of /dev Message-ID: <200003291850.LAA22495@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <xzpg0tbxoa9.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> from "Dag-Erling Smorgrav" at Mar 28, 2000 02:38:38 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > In message <xzpsnxbxor2.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes: > > > Anyway, since /dev/std* never change, how about having fdesc *only* > > > handle the /dev/fd/* stuff, so you can (non-union) mount it on /dev/fd > > > and let /dev/std* be either symlinks to /dev/fd/[012] or plain old > > > static device nodes like they're now? > > Symlinks have my vote. > > The downside is they'll be broken if fdesc isn't mounted... The other downside is that, unlike devfs contents, they'll get just as stale just as fast as /dev gets out of date with the currently running kernel and/or MAKEDEV. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003291850.LAA22495>