Now your just attacking without backing yourself up. I hate that.
> > 2.) devfs reduces the number of devices in /dev to a minimum, thus
> > reducing a number of inodes and some hard-disk and RAM. This
> > has also the advantage that it is easy to determine which
> > devices are in the system.
>
> It stores *ALL* its inodes in RAM, whereas an on-disk /dev never
> brings them in if they aren't actively used.
Only the device nodes you *HAVE*. In a small machine, it's VERY little!!!
> > 4.) devfs also makes it possible to mount your root on other
> > filesystems, like e.g. a CD-ROM or a non-unix filesystem.
>
> You can do that anyway.
No, you can't have a /dev on a VFAT volume. Now you're just being
ignorant.
> > 5.) devfs is also claimed to be faster, in that you do not have to
> > go to an external device to get major and minor device numbers.
>
> This speed difference is at the best very slight, and might just as
> well be a lose due to the loss of additional kernel RAM. Any device
> used with any frequency is going to be cached in the VFS anyway.
NOONE has claimed this to be the end-all of "good things" in DevFS. Do
you really feel that you have to try to destroy all that is DevFS??? You
seem to have an objection that is soooo complete, yet you cite NO reasons
that it is bad.
-Shawn
<=========== America Held Hostage ===========>
Day 2027 for the poor and the middle class.
Day 2046 for the rich and the dead.
895 days remaining in the Raw Deal.
<============================================>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html