From owner-freebsd-current Thu Sep 14 13:34:27 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.100.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ACA237B424; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA199770; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 16:31:25 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <56076.968924938@critter> References: <56076.968924938@critter> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 16:33:55 -0400 To: Poul-Henning Kamp , Peter Pentchev From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: Fdescfs updates--coming to a devfs near you! Cc: Julian Elischer , Chris Costello , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 11:48 AM +0200 9/14/00, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >I must admit that I think in general that /dev/std{in,out,err} >and /dev/fd is bogus. It looks like something which happened >"because we can" more than something which has a legitimate need. > >If anything I would propose we ditch it... I think it is a reasonable feature to have. It probably won't be useful all that often, but it could be very useful in some situations. I know I've hit situations where I wished I could do something like this, but I couldn't tell you an example right this minute. So, I wouldn't want to see fdesfs ditched, but on the other hand I don't have any clue how to address the loose ends that Chris mentioned in his initial message. :-) --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or drosih@rpi.edu Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message