[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Can you give us a rundown on how to get this to work? I followed the
> instructions in the README but the permissions and owner/group bits never
> stayed the way I wanted them. (eg: root.audio for all of /dev/sound,
If you use devfsd from unstable then there is a fil
> That installed a script(s?) in /etc/init.d, which start devfsd at
> boot-time. Of course, you have to have the kernel automatically mount
> devfs in /dev, which is available as an option in the kernel
> pre-compilation configuration. If you didn't select it there, add
> "devfs=mount" as an argume
To quote [EMAIL PROTECTED],
# Can you give us a rundown on how to get this to work? I followed the
# instructions in the README but the permissions and owner/group bits
never
# stayed the way I wanted them. (eg: root.audio for all of /dev/sound,
# root.video for all of /dev/v4l, etc). I'm using
> > chgrp wheel /dev/somedevice
> > chmod 660 /dev/somedevice
> >
> > and have it stick. (past reboots)
>
> With devfsd this is also very simple possible.
Can you give us a rundown on how to get this to work? I followed the
instructions in the README but the permissions and owner/group bits n
To quote Stefan Nobis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
# No, but Andreas stated clearly that he don't want to use devfsd. And
the above
# are the internal names of devfs and the device drivers. The other
names like
# /dev/discs/disc0 and the like are the user friendly naming scheme
which is
# brought to you wi
Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> very funny, im sure you would like it if someone FORCED you to use
> *only* KDE or *only* gnome. the Free software movement is about
> freedom and choices and *options* i should have the *option* to turn
> that `feature' off.
>
> don't force your pref
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Andreas" == Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Andreas> 2.) boot. fsck will fail. do manual fsck, remount / rw,
> Andreas> edit /etc/fstab: /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1
> Andreas> /boot ext2 defaults 0 2
> A
Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> instead of /dev/hda1 or /dev/wd0a whenever i need to do anything
> related to raw devices is a performance improvment. nor is writing
> huge kludgy initscripts or bloated daemons just so i can do:
I can't see why a daemon about 30k in size is bloated.
> lr-xr-xr-x1 root root 33 Jan 1 1970 /dev/cdroms/cdrom0 ->
> ../ide/host0/bus1/target1/lun0/cd
> lr-xr-xr-x1 root root 30 Jan 1 1970 /dev/discs/disc0 ->
> ../ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/
> lr-xr-xr-x1 root root 30 Jan 1 1970 /dev/discs/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
> On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 06:09:54PM +0100, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> > 2.) boot. fsck will fail. do manual fsck, remount / rw, edit /etc/fstab:
> > /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1 /
Ethan Benson writes:
> don't force your preferences on others. you like devfs use it, don't
> force me to do the same.
You are free to fork your own version of Debian and/or the Linux kernel
whenever you see fit.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
To quote Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
# So if you have a problem with something, talk to the authors. Spewing
# bile across the lists of an unrelated project is just going to be
# conterproductive for you in the long run.
I apologize for my part in this argument. It really upsets me to see
this,
Ethan Benson wrote:
> i have heard all the arguments for devfs (long ago on linux-kernel) i
> still don't want it. i just want the option to leave it off is that
> so much to ask?
I'm puzzled. You're saying you are a subscriber to linux-kernel. So why
are you posting your drivel *here*?
The user
On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 12:03:54PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
>
> My understanding is that chown/chgrp/chmod will work fine without
> devfsd.
as long as you never reboot. i don't reboot often, but i have to do
it from time to time.
i have heard all the arguments for devfs (long ago on linux-kernel
To quote Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
# On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 07:46:53PM -0500, David B. Harris wrote:
# > You might want to consider changing your attitude a bit. These
people
#
# oh i want choice, my attitude is clearly flawed afterall if i did not
# want choice i would still be letting M
> "Ethan" == Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ethan> On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 06:38:16PM -0600, Jason Holland
Ethan> wrote:
>> Devfs has a compatibility mode which can be turned on. it
>> enables the old device paths, like /dev/hda4, to coexist with
>> the new paths
On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 11:52:17AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
>
> Have a look at Documentation/filesystems/devfs/README, with the Linux
> kernel (at least 2.4.0test10) - there are a number of good reasons for
> why devfs is required, mentioned there. I recommend anyone interested
> in devfs should re
On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 12:51:58AM +, Pollywog wrote:
> I am confused.Is there some stuff I need to read in order to
> prepare for this change in my favorite OS?
> Just tell me what I need to read and I will get right on it. If I
> have to migrate, I need a map :)
you don't need to mi
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 07:46:53PM -0500, David B. Harris wrote:
> You might want to consider changing your attitude a bit. These people
oh i want choice, my attitude is clearly flawed afterall if i did not
want choice i would still be letting MS or Apple tell me what to do.
--
Ethan Benson
ht
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 06:50:52PM -0600, Jason Holland wrote:
>
> haha! i happen to agree that the path names are ridiculous. however, i'd
they certainly are rediculous.
> rather have a 100 devices to look through, than 5000 without devfs turned
> on. isn't it nice to have a choice?
yes its
> "Ethan" == Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ethan> On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 01:34:07PM -0500, S.Salman Ahmed
Ethan> wrote:
>> I have one question regarding devfs: does it offer any
>> performance improvements over the traditional non-devfs setup,
>> or is devfs sim
I am confused. Is there some stuff I need to read in order to
prepare for this change in my favorite OS?
Just tell me what I need to read and I will get right on it. If I
have to migrate, I need a map :)
--
Andrew
On Sat, 6 Jan 2001 15:46:13 -0900, Ethan Benson said:
> On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 06:38:16PM -0600, Jason Holland wrote:
> > Devfs has a compatibility mode which can be turned on. it
> enables the old
> > device paths, like /dev/hda4, to coexist with the new
> paths, though mount
> > will report the new path.
>
> it does that though a kludge daemon
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 06:38:16PM -0600, Jason Holland wrote:
> Devfs has a compatibility mode which can be turned on. it enables the old
> device paths, like /dev/hda4, to coexist with the new paths, though mount
> will report the new path.
it does that though a kludge daemon. the same kludge
To quote Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
# i fail to see how typing:
#
# /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1
#
# instead of /dev/hda1 or /dev/wd0a whenever i need to do anything
# related to raw devices is a performance improvment. nor is writing
# huge kludgy initscripts or bloated daemons
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 07:21:11PM -0500, David B. Harris wrote:
> To quote Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> # > 2.) boot. fsck will fail. do manual fsck, remount / rw, edit
> /etc/fstab:
> # > /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1 /boot ext2 defaults0
> 2
> # > /dev/ide/host0/bu
Devfs has a compatibility mode which can be turned on. it enables the old
device paths, like /dev/hda4, to coexist with the new paths, though mount
will report the new path.
Jason
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 01:34:07PM -0500, S.Salman Ahmed wrote:
> >
> > I have one question regarding devfs: d
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 01:34:07PM -0500, S.Salman Ahmed wrote:
>
> I have one question regarding devfs: does it offer any performance
> improvements over the traditional non-devfs setup, or is devfs simply a
> 'structural' change ?
i fail to see how typing:
/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part
> "Andreas" == Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andreas> 2.) boot. fsck will fail. do manual fsck, remount / rw,
Andreas> edit /etc/fstab: /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1
Andreas> /boot ext2 defaults 0 2
Andreas> /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part2 none
To quote Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
# > 2.) boot. fsck will fail. do manual fsck, remount / rw, edit
/etc/fstab:
# > /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1 /boot ext2 defaults 0 2
# > /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part2 none swap sw 0 0
# > /dev/ide/host0/bus0
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 06:09:54PM +0100, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> 2.) boot. fsck will fail. do manual fsck, remount / rw, edit /etc/fstab:
> /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1 /boot ext2 defaults0 2
> /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part2 none swap sw 0 >
31 matches
Mail list logo
