Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 5 Apr 2000 15:20:35 -0500
From:      Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com>
To:        Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>
Cc:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Proposal: Union mount of fdesc on top of /dev
Message-ID:  <20000405152035.T27486@holly.calldei.com>
In-Reply-To: <xzpln2srjps.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
References:  <xzp8zytsvyj.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <200004042335.QAA12839@usr05.primenet.com> <20000404193257.N27486@holly.calldei.com> <xzpln2srjps.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, April 05, 2000, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com> writes:
> >    However, I don't think they will last forever, but will probably
> > be supported up to a certain date before which "everybody has to
> > MAKEDEV". I also do not think /dev/stdxxx will be considered "not
> > useful", but they, as separate device nodes, are certainly "bloat"
> > considering that fdesc can be used for this and is much simpler, so
> > why not keep the /dev files and lose the kernel /dev/std* code (and
> > put in the fdesc code).
> 
> There is no "kernel /dev/std*" code. /dev/std* are simply fd nodes
> with different names. They have the same major and minor numbers as
> /dev/fd/[012].

   It works just as well without that last sentence, then, and
the point is generally the same.

-- 
|Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com>
|You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers.
`---------------------------------------------------------------




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?20000405152035.T27486>