Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: UUIDs (and devfs and major/minor numbers) | Date | Sat, 19 Jun 1999 12:09:32 -0400 | From | "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <> |
| |
In message <Pine.LNX.4.05.9906191036140.26257-100000@mhw.ULib.IUPUI.Edu>, "Mark H. Wood" writes: +----- | On Sat, 19 Jun 1999, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote: | > Someone please explain: | > | > (1) why exporting this information from the kernel in the arguably most | > useful form --- a virtual filesystem --- is more evil than exporting it | > as e.g. a /proc file or a generator sysctl(); | | You have to parse filesystem paths if you want to understand them. You | have to either agree on a one-size-fits-all naming scheme, or use multiple +--->8
But you have to parse any other naming scheme, including a sysctl()-based one. And the kernel can't reasonably generate every possible representation of the device tree, whether by devfs, SYS$GETDVI(), /proc files, etc.
| devfs detractor either; at most I've asked people to consider whether a | filesystem hierarchy is really the most appropriate representation for the | various information that we all want. +--->8
Why wouldn't it be? In its most generalized form, a filesystem is a hierarchical database used for kernel-to-userspace communication, which is why Plan 9 generalized it to namespaces and why there is e.g. /proc. It seems ridiculously narrow to restrict filesystems to handling only real "files": where do you draw the line? Network filesystems? Devices themselves (shades of DEC OSes)?
-- brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] allbery@kf8nh.apk.net system administrator [WAY too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu carnegie mellon / electrical and computer engineering KF8NH We are Linux. Resistance is an indication that you missed the point.
- 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.tux.org/lkml/
| |