Subject: Re: kernel & libkvm [was IIci success]
To: Michael Graff <email@example.com>
From: Ty Sarna <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/11/1996 15:38:34
Michael Graff wrote:
> Why not? Having a /dev which configures itself sounds like a handy
> feature to me.
Sure, as long as /dev doesn't turn into a symlink hellhole. If /dev was
just a symlink to /kern/dev, that would work fine but would mean /kern
would have to be mounted at boot time, which then begs the question
"what happens if the root filesystem doesn't have a dev entry?". I
suppose this can be deal with, though. I'm all for a fully automatic
device node directory as long as this stuff can be resolved reasonably.
> >Also, I would like to see a /kern/systype entry and kern.systype sysctl
> >with an AFS-compatible system name (i386_nbsd11, etc) *EVEN IF* we never
> >get @names in the filesystem. It's still useful for other things, and
> >it's nice to have readily availible.
> I still want to have @sys processing. But naming the different archs
> now would simplify many things, like having a common name for
> installation programs to use. This should also be sysctl gettable, so
> /kern isn't needed to get the standard system name.
Isn't that what I said? :-)