> Maybe so, but how can we support a "no devfs allowed here" for those
> who depend on the decades-old existinge semantics?

Is that really an issue?  NetBSD hasn't minded breaking decades-old
existing interfaces in other cases.  (I'm thinking in particular of the
switch to the SV tty driver interface and shoving readline into ftp and
gdb.  Especially the creative whatever-it-is that apparently makes it
impossible to turn some aspects of readline off under gdb, PR 29597.)

Okay, maybe gdb isn't decades-old so its interface isn't, but....

And lest you think I'm just complaining, I'm not.  I think the tty
driver switch was mostly a good thing, for all that it irritated me at
the time.  (This is of course orthogonal to whether any particular
devfs semantics would be good.)

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B