Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 13:23:10 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: devfs questions Message-ID: <199604072023.NAA00508@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199604070101.DAA15010@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Apr 7, 96 03:01:37 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I still think that devfs should export the root directory and a dev > > directory and be mounted in the kernel. > > Why? And what's devfs' job wrt. the root dir? To export one so that root mount can be cone as a union mount and the devfs doesn't have to be mounted as a result of init (the mount of root would need to give priority to the devfs). > > I think it is a bad thing to chang init this way. > > What's the basical difference? (Despite, it's perhaps not much harder > either, but i'm curious about your reasons.) All the code can go into the kernel, and it doesn't have to be overly complicated. And for ports to new platforms, only a working ethernet driver is necesssary to get up initially. If the registration mechanisms for various slice management methods are provided in a kernel, it means a FreeBSD kernel could boot and run on a Linux box with no other changes to the Linux box. The same for any other i386 UNIX-like OS, for that matter, as long as the FS can be located in the local slicing/partitioning information and the FS there can be mounted. Think "FreeBSD now offering an upgrade to existing Linux systems". 8-). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604072023.NAA00508>