Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

David Scheidt wrote: > > What's wrong with run with system V runlevels? Other than it's system V and > everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course. They try to map graphs into a line. -- Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS) who is as social as a wampas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTEC

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 12:07:49AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > I would prefer if the lines could be added to /etc/ttys somewhat > like: > sshd "/usr/local/sbin/sshd" none ondemand > > And then we could > telinit -on sshd > telinit -off sshd hal:/service# ls -l telnetd tot

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

> On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 01:22:46AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote: > > > runlevels, OpenBSD does not or goes with an entirely different > > system), them would it be fair to consider FreeBSD "BSD"? The > > advantage here is that FreeBSD would mature into it's own type of > > UNIX with a BSD heri

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 01:22:46AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote: > runlevels, OpenBSD does not or goes with an entirely different > system), them would it be fair to consider FreeBSD "BSD"? The > advantage here is that FreeBSD would mature into it's own type of > UNIX with a BSD heritage. Can

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

David Scheidt wrote: > What's wrong with run with system V runlevels? Other than it's system V and > everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course. Well, the one danger is that we'd be slowly drifting away from the classic BSD way of doing thigs. Of course, the official BSD is dead (right?). But

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peter Jeremy writes : >On 1999-Dec-16 07:48:48 +1100, Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>And we don't really need YAD when we have init hanging around doing >>nothing for its keep anyway... > >I beg to differ. To quote init(8): > The role of init is

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dav > id Scheidt writes: > >What's wrong with run with system V runlevels? Other than it's system V and > >everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course. > > runlevels are a very oldfashioned way to think about thing

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Jacob writes: >> > >> >I was just thinking it could get tricky and have subtle ordering bugs of >> >new tty devices, changes to ttys and signals all about the same time. >> >> Well, they are no less subtle by having them in different processes... > >No, bu

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dav id Scheidt writes: >On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes: >> >> I would really like to see the devd functionality to live in init >> and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to kee

Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes: > > I would really like to see the devd functionality to live in init > and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to keep > important programs running, things like sshd, inetd, sysl

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Jacob writes: >> >Isn't this throwing an awful lot onto init? >> >> Not really... >> >> The meta-daemon part is no different from keeping gettys in the air... >> >> The devd thing consists of selecting on some magic fd and running a >> program when somet

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Jacob writes: >> > >> I would really like to see the devd functionality to live in init >> and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to keep >> important programs running, things like sshd, inetd, syslogd and >> similar should be restarted i

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes: >In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes: >: A "devd" program would solve 98% of what devfs could solve. It cannot >: solve the homebrew-a-vnode-for-the-root-fs problem. FreeBSD needs a >: "devd" program *anyway* because what go

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes: : A "devd" program would solve 98% of what devfs could solve. It cannot : solve the homebrew-a-vnode-for-the-root-fs problem. FreeBSD needs a : "devd" program *anyway* because what good is dynamic devices if you : can't do something intell

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Daniel C. Sobral" writes: >"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote: >> >> Yea... been hearing that for 4 years... one of it's big short comings is >> that it needs a persistent backing store for this. Sounds like this C >> program could fullfill one of the missing parts of devf

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote: > > Yea... been hearing that for 4 years... one of it's big short comings is > that it needs a persistent backing store for this. Sounds like this C > program could fullfill one of the missing parts of devfs :-) F persistent backing store. The daemon solution is perfec

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brian Somers writes: : *cough*DEVFS*cough* devfs*D* Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 01:39:28AM +, Brian Somers wrote: > [.] > > On a related subject: don't you think it's high time to end up this > > madness with MAKEDEV being a shell script, and reimplement it in C? Today, > [.] > *cough*DEVFS*cough* Gesunteit. - mark -- Mark Newt

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

> [.] > > On a related subject: don't you think it's high time to end up this > > madness with MAKEDEV being a shell script, and reimplement it in C? Today, > [.] > *cough*DEVFS*cough* Yea... been hearing that for 4 years... one of it's big short comings is that it needs a persistent back

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[.] > On a related subject: don't you think it's high time to end up this > madness with MAKEDEV being a shell script, and reimplement it in C? Today, [.] *cough*DEVFS*cough* -- Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>