> David Weinehall wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 5 Oct 1999, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >
> > > David Weinehall wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Oh, and have you actually ever tried a system running devfs (such as a
> > > > kernel patched with Richard Gooch' patch, or a Solaris-system), or?
> > > >
> > > > Hmmm. If USB isn't enough to convince, think about USB2 (128 devices/bus
> > > > if I'm not all wrong), FireWire, FibreChannel, SCSI-III, etc. Sooner or
> > > > later we need a solution to the problem with devices. And devfs is a very
> > > > good, thought-through, proven to work (been used in Solaris for many
> > > > years) and backward-compatible solution. And it's available now.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Solaris does *not* use devfs; the /devices tree is an on-disk device
> > > node tree which is constructed at initialization time, and it is
> > > persistent. A much better solution, IMNSHO.
> >
> > Why is that? You get the same layout with a dynamic-filesystem; the
> > difference is that with dynamic devices it becomes FAR easier to support
> > plug'n'play devices.
> >
>
> You get persistence; because the /devices tree is augmented, but not
> blindly.
That's what devfsd is for (persistance.)
/David Weinehall
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/