On 03 Jun 2002 23:04:46 +0100
Alex Hudson <home [at] alexhudson.com> wrote:
> I would love to see you try that. You _will_ break many, many things.
> Device access has bog all to do with it. You will break find, for
> example, which will probably jolly up your cron, and many, many other
> POSIX utilities. Unless you don't mind having a non-POSIX conformant
> OS, of course.. and trying to watch you access your sound system -
> mixer settings, dsp, etc. - would be very funny too.
So what would happen if you have devfs and more than 128 (IIRC) SCSI
disks? You will be outside the major/minor address space - this is what
devfs was designed for - so would 'find' break on the 129th disk?
If you mount a filesystems using NFS it will have no associated /dev
entry (and hence no majors and minors). This doesn't seem to bother
'find' (or indeed any other POSIX utility).
As for /dev/{mixer|dsp} as soon as OSS gets a devfs interface (if it
doesn't have one already) it's dependency on it's major and minor will
go.
> That is a silly line to draw. Is a RAM FS a 'virtual' filesystem? Both
> ramfs' and procfs (for e
<...snip...>
> it both. But don't let that bother you :P
> A filesystem is a filesystem, unless it's a HURD translator of
> course..
OK I give in. Pedantic point anyway :P
--Andrew
--
sparc sun4c stuff:
http://www.lostgeneration.freeserve.co.uk/sparc
PGP key for list [at] lostgeneration.freeserve.co.uk:
http://www.lostgeneration.freeserve.co.uk/list.freeserve.co.uk.asc
Attachment:
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature