Re: udev and devfs - The final word

Mark Mielke
2004-01-05T22:23:07Z

On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 05:36:09PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc> writes:
> > There are a few cases that we might be forced to maintain regular
> > numbers: mkfifo() creates a named pipe, and bind() creates a named
> > socket.
> Neither fifos nor sockets are devices.

Well, then, as long as things like this don't break... :-)

Other than backing up /dev, does anybody have *real* cases where a
program assumes major:minor is consistent across reboots? We should
start notifying the authors now... NFS seems to be one, given the
explanation offered for how fsid's are derived...

mark

--
mark@mielke.cc/markm@ncf.ca/markm@nortelnetworks.com __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...