Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 18:12:59 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: David Scheidt <dscheidt@enteract.com> Cc: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au>, Steve Ames <steve@virtual-voodoo.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Problems with MAKEDEV. Message-ID: <200004150012.SAA11441@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96.1000414183306.87696A-100000@shell-1.enteract.com> References: <00Apr15.092900est.115218@border.alcanet.com.au> <Pine.NEB.3.96.1000414183306.87696A-100000@shell-1.enteract.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > >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? You can easily run out of inodes on the roof partition. Nate 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?200004150012.SAA11441>