Subject: Re: devfs, was Re: ptyfs fully working now...
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/13/2004 02:47:17
In article <Pine.GSO.4.61.0411130322550.24882@rfhpc8317>,
Hubert Feyrer <email@example.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> permissions. Or if it is DIRTY it is written on unmount. The file can live
>> under the mount if we don't want it accessible. We also provide a simple
>> character device that when we cat it, it provides a textual description of
>> the current set of commands.
>Um... isn't that a bit much magic at the end?
The whole point of the design is to make the configuration process invisible
to the user; they don't need to know even that this file exists. Both the
file and its contents are implementation dependent.
>Maybe just put it in /var/db?
One idea I had was to put it under the mount point so it is not
visible/accessible. As far as putting it in /dev/db, you can
always do that.
>BTW, I like the idea to have shell-like syntax in that file... can we move
>/bin/sh into the kernel? *duck & run*
Ah and I forgot one more command that should be supported chflags, and that
takes another bit.
BTW, most of the code needed to do this is already in ptyfs. So it would take
less than a week of programming time to have a working prototype.