Subject: Re: [README] MI device major assignment
To: David Laight <david@l8s.co.uk>
From: Greg A. Woods <woods@weird.com>
List: tech-kern
Date: 10/09/2003 02:06:53
[ On Wednesday, October 8, 2003 at 20:04:33 (+0100), David Laight wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: [README] MI device major assignment
>
> > mtree seems to have far more capability for managing device nodes than
> > pax could ever have, ...
> 
> Wanna bet?
> Anything lacking can always be added :-)
>     echo ... | pax -wM -f /dev/null
> will probably suffice with the current binary though.

Ah, I see, you're talking about NetBSD's pax!  ;-)
and of course you're using pax just as if it was mtree....

(My sometimes fuzzy memory had me thinking the device creation abilities
of mtree were in the original 4.3net2 release, and thus were much more
portable than they obviously are so indeed there's no advantage to using
mtree over "pax -M")

> In any case the 'best' solution is to write devfs!

No argument there!  ;-)

-- 
						Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098                  VE3TCP            RoboHack <woods@robohack.ca>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>          Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>