Re: UUIDs (and devfs and major/minor numbers)
H. Peter Anvin (email@example.com)
Fri, 18 Jun 1999 01:07:52 -0700
Richard Gooch wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin writes:
> > Dan Hollis wrote:
> > > 1) you can also symlink devfs.
> > > 2) devfs still has permissions.
> > Yes, and they go away every time, completely nullifying the utility.
> > In short, YES YOU CAN DO IT. It's no longer a clean solution, but
> > nothing but a gross hack.
> It's completely untrue that persistence for devfs is a gross hack. It
> is true that the current user space scheme (using tar) is a hack. And
> I've had plans right from the start to address that. But that is a
> user space issue and shouldn't be held against devfs.
> With devfsd, I have a very nice way of implementing persistence. I can
> support the existing semantics, where a sysadmin goes in and manually
> changes things, and I already support a more powerful scheme where
> groups of device entries are "saved".
In other words, you can implement what traditional filesystems can do.
We know that. It also means devfs is superfluous. You might as well
have a devmgr process with no need for a devfs at all.
"The user's computer downloads the ActiveX code and simulates a 'Blue
Screen' crash, a generally benign event most users are familiar with
and that would not necessarily arouse suspicions."
-- Security exploit description on http://www.zks.net/p3/how.asp
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/