Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:07:25 +0000
From:      Freminlins <freminlins@gmail.com>
To:        "Kris Kennaway" <kris@obsecurity.org>
Cc:        questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: mknod, devfs and FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <eeef1a4c0701290507n1aa08ebby380cc688f23ed09e@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070128184925.GB61662@xor.obsecurity.org>
References:  <eeef1a4c0701260840pef414f9h3e76fce789c06386@mail.gmail.com> <20070126174826.GA13730@xor.obsecurity.org> <eeef1a4c0701261505g7258ae9cx7bcb70a825fb8c88@mail.gmail.com> <20070126234756.GA19420@xor.obsecurity.org> <eeef1a4c0701280756m3014f3acu15398d43e7a309e2@mail.gmail.com> <20070128184925.GB61662@xor.obsecurity.org>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Kris,

On 28/01/07, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote:
>
>
> I not understand this no sentence :)


Sorry, I didn't read what I typed. I meant to type "Was the effect of this
considered at all?"

What reasons, other than cosmetic, do you have for not wanting to do
> this?


Well, I am sure you would agree it is simpler to mknod for a small subset of
/dev than to mount a devfs. Also, it means I have to migrate my existing set
up which works perfectly as it is.

It isn't just cosmetic, it really is more awkward than running mknod. I take
your point that there's no technical reason not to do this, but it isn't
pretty.

Kris


Frem.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?eeef1a4c0701290507n1aa08ebby380cc688f23ed09e>