Date: Sat, 14 Feb 1998 15:20:59 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <dyson@FreeBSD.ORG> To: wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Cc: eivind@yes.no, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: devfs persistence Message-ID: <199802142020.PAA00219@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <199802140238.VAA28185@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> from Garrett Wollman at "Feb 13, 98 09:38:56 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garrett Wollman said: > <<On Sat, 14 Feb 1998 02:40:18 +0100, Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> said: > > > cases. Now, _including this requirement_, wouldn't it still feel good > > to actually get DEVFS integrated and usable as the default _now_? > > No. I see no particular need for DEVFS. While it certainly moves > some problems around, it's a substantial break with the POLA. (I > didn't always think so, but considering the vigor of this flame war, > it's clear that we are not even close to consensus.) > There are (at least) two usages of FreeBSD. One is standard U**X type things, and the other is embedded controllers. DEVFS is especially useful for embedded (not all NFS servers can provide device nodes, for example.) I don't know which is better DEVFS default or not DEVFS default. However, DEVFS is important (or at least useful) for a significant portion of the FreeBSD development and user base. -- John | Never try to teach a pig to sing, dyson@freebsd.org | it just makes you look stupid, jdyson@nc.com | and it irritates the pig. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802142020.PAA00219>