Subject: Re: representation of persistent device status, was Re: devfs, was Re: ptyfs...
To: Daniel Carosone <email@example.com>
From: Jason Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/24/2004 13:54:25
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
On Nov 19, 2004, at 3:52 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
> The chroot case is a clear and obvious one: you want only very
> particular devices to exist, or not, and perhaps also with different
> permissions that their equivalents in the "real" /dev. Adding a bunch
> of smart "filtering" to duplicated devfs submounts is possible, but
> seems excessive, complex and error-prone.
In fact, per-mount "filtering" is employed in other devfs
implementations that are out there.
Really, what you want from a devfs is:
- A list of device nodes that exist
- One or more views of that list of device nodes, which may be
fully populated, partially populated, allows presentation of
newly-discovered nodes or not, and has its own set of permissions.
-- Jason R. Thorpe <email@example.com>
content-type: application/pgp-signature; x-mac-type=70674453;
content-description: This is a digitally signed message part
content-disposition: inline; filename=PGP.sig
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----