Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 14 Apr 2000 18:34:13 -0500 (CDT)
From:      David Scheidt <dscheidt@enteract.com>
To:        Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au>
Cc:        Steve Ames <steve@virtual-voodoo.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Problems with MAKEDEV.
Message-ID:  <Pine.NEB.3.96.1000414183306.87696A-100000@shell-1.enteract.com>
In-Reply-To: <00Apr15.092900est.115218@border.alcanet.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Peter Jeremy wrote:

> On 2000-Apr-14 22:49:40 +1000, Steve Ames <steve@virtual-voodoo.com> wrote:
> >That's always struck me a bit odd... I thought 'MAKEDEV std' made
> >the generic set of devices and that 'MAKEDEV all' should make... well..
> >_ALL_. *shrug*
> 
> What do you define as `all'?  Say I have a big FTP server with 8 wide
> SCSI controllers, each with 15 disks - that's da0..da119.  I might
> have a big shell (or similar) server that needs a few thousand PTYs.
> I could have all sorts of other wierd hardware.  "MAKEDEV all" has to
> draw the line somewhere.


Sure.  What's the point of having both std and all, though?  How much does
it hurt to have a few extra device files kicking around?  

David



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.NEB.3.96.1000414183306.87696A-100000>