From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 19:11:00 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] editing device_table_dev.txt In-Reply-To: <20130224182620.2283ceb3@skate> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:26:20 +0100") References: <1361403460.22521.44.camel@genx.eng.msli.com> <5125F38B.2030204@petroprogram.com> <5125F50C.7020902@petroprogram.com> <20130221102315.GB12155@sapphire.tkos.co.il> <5125F7BB.50403@petroprogram.com> <5126A675.2060308@mind.be> <5126A8C7.2000009@petroprogram.com> <5126AC9B.30302@mind.be> <20130224182620.2283ceb3@skate> Message-ID: <877glxbn0r.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: >> Turns out that mdev still does device node creation. Makes me >> wonder if I'm not mistaken about udev as well... I just remember >> hearing that device node creation was removed when DEVTMPFS was >> introduced. Thomas> Yes, I think you got the thing wrong: udev and mdev are still Thomas> creating the device nodes. Of course, they might have already Thomas> been created by devtmpfs, but I don't think it is a Thomas> requirement. At least, devtmpfs is definitely not a requirement Thomas> for mdev to work (except in Buildroot, in which we made the Thomas> decision that if mdev is to be used, then devtmpfs support must Thomas> be there). And the main reason for this is that you need a writable /dev and basic device nodes before mdev starts up, and the simplest way of getting this is using devtmpfs. What mdev/udev buys you over pure devtmpfs is the possibility of custom rules (names/permissions/programs executed). -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard