From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Czlbc-00077B-9q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:57:53 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CzlbY-00074X-Gh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:57:49 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CzlbY-00074N-DE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:57:48 -0500 Received: from [65.19.178.186] (helo=pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CzlO8-0004bL-94 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:43:56 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 576AE403D4 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:43:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 03713-07 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:43:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D680403CF for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:43:31 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Major 254 From: Darryl Dixon In-Reply-To: <20050211234027.GA8846@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> References: <1108163861.7659.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050211234027.GA8846@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-4dkk1GnXb/excouGxym1" Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:43:29 +1300 Message-Id: <1108169010.7659.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: esrever_otua@pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net, qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org --=-4dkk1GnXb/excouGxym1 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Good question, I didn't even know that was possible; but if the major number was auto-assigned, how would the correct device node be created for it at install time? D On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 18:40 -0500, Jim C. Brown wrote: > I am curious why qemu just doesn't set the device number to 0 (which would > allow it to be assigned one by the kernel). Or was that feature removed when > devfs was obsoleted? > -- Darryl Dixon --=-4dkk1GnXb/excouGxym1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Good question, I didn't even know that was possible; but if the major number was auto-assigned, how would the correct device node be created for it at install time?

D


On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 18:40 -0500, Jim C. Brown wrote: 
I am curious why qemu just doesn't set the device number to 0 (which would
allow it to be assigned one by the kernel). Or was that feature removed when
devfs was obsoleted?
--
Darryl Dixon <esrever_otua@pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net>
--=-4dkk1GnXb/excouGxym1--