Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 17:21:57 +0200 (CEST) From: Harti Brandt <brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: David Gilbert <dgilbert@dclg.ca> Cc: ecsd <ecsd@ecsd.com> Subject: Re: cannot create partition entries for /dev/ad3 Message-ID: <20031009171829.Y980@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> In-Reply-To: <16261.27258.563735.274938@canoe.dclg.ca> References: <3F8279C5.9070300@ecsd.com> <200310071929.30826.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <16261.27258.563735.274938@canoe.dclg.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, David Gilbert wrote: DG>>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel O'Connor <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> writes: DG> DG>Daniel> The only reason most people will ever touch /dev is to either DG>Daniel> make devices (hence no longer necessary with devfs), or change DG>Daniel> permissions. The later is more difficult with devfs, but IMHO DG>Daniel> the tradeoff is worthwhile. DG> DG>This brings me to my (small) beef with devfs. When you invoke an DG>abstraction, a metric of the usefulness of that abstraction is how DG>well the abstractions metaphors map onto the target system's DG>metaphors. DG> DG>So as a filesystem, devfs does will by replicating the average DG>person's view of should be in /dev ... subject to what devices are DG>actually found... DG> DG>But filesystems also have persistence. In the trivial case, the DG>persistence of the object (say ... a disk) preserved the filesystems DG>node. But if I walk into /dev and change the permissions on a node, DG>this persists only until the next reboot. Filesystems not necessarily have persistance. Although it would be fancy to be able to backup and restore /proc or /portal. Many devices (especially with all this hot-plugable stuff today) are not persistant, why should their representation be? harti -- harti brandt, http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/research/cc/cats/employees/hartmut.brandt/private brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de, harti@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031009171829.Y980>