Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 20 Apr 1995 06:44:17 -0500 (CDT)
From:      Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com>
To:        bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans)
Cc:        julian@freefall.cdrom.com, hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: [DEVFS] your opinions sought!
Message-ID:  <199504201144.GAA17992@bonkers.taronga.com>
In-Reply-To: <199504200741.RAA06984@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Apr 20, 95 05:41:13 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >	sd0 is the first scsi disk

> >	c0t0l0 is the disk at scsi bus 0 target 0 lun 0

> This would defeat one advantage of devfs - reduction of clutter in /dev.

Why? Only the one you're using would be symlinked into dev. If you're running
an unattended machine you don't want disks drifting to new locations when one
goes down.

> Why decides how h/w/ devices are mapped to ttys?

So if your COM2 board goes out you don't find your unattended SLIP connection
trying to talk to your Postscript laser printer and you've got a non-callbacked
getty suddenly talking to your V.34 modem. In an unattended machine the BSD
"device drift" problem is a real concern.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504201144.GAA17992>