Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 09:46:10 +0930 (CST) From: Mark Newton <newton@internode.com.au> To: julian@whistle.com (Julian Elischer) Cc: gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu, winter@jurai.net, chuckr@mat.net, wayne@crb-web.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: what is devfs? Message-ID: <199909210016.JAA35050@gizmo.internode.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.990920163316.6478C-100000@current1.whistle.com> from "Julian Elischer" at Sep 20, 99 04:35:47 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote: > On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > > one thing that HAS to happen is the fast that some devices CAN'T "appeare" > > until the devfsd says it can, unless we force a very restrictive permision > > on all devices (600 or something similar) otherwise we will have security > > wholes up the wazoo... don't forget about this... a devfsd daemon is > > definately the way to go... > > While I sharply disagree, with your assertion, I also point out that if > you make such a all-singing-all-dancing devfsd, then you might as well get > rid of devfs entirely, and just have devfsd make the devices using normal > mknod commands. Hmm - rip out the whole devfs infrastructure and replace it with something which writes tuples of (operation, devname, major, minor) to a socket somewhere, where "operation" is "create", "delete", "online", "offline", etc. Why worry about the complexities of a vfs to handle /dev in the kernel when almost all of it can be done in userland? [ Heh. *now* there'll be some wailing and gnashing of teeth... :-) ] - mark ---- Mark Newton Email: newton@internode.com.au (W) Network Engineer Email: newton@atdot.dotat.org (H) Internode Systems Pty Ltd Desk: +61-8-82232999 "Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton" Mobile: +61-416-202-223 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199909210016.JAA35050>