Ken Moffat wrote:
[...]
> Most of us manage to avoid writing initscripts until we have
> a concrete need. I'm slightly frightened by your premise that
> you need to create device nodes because udev doesn't.
>
> What sort of devices are these ?
>
> Rereading what you wrote, perhaps I'm confused - I don't
> understand why you want to do without udev (yes, it's nasty,
> and at least one person of taste seems to still avoid it, but
> for most of us it works adequately.
Erm, I tried udev on my host system for a brief period,
and decided I disliked the _philosophy_ behind it. I read
the author's description of the "problem", much of which
I agreed with, and so I downloaded his source, and did some
fooling around. After a very brief sojourn into his world,
I came to the conclusion that he and I had entirely different
goals in mind, his wordage notwithstanding. The approach
seems wrongheaded to me, and actually does _not_ solve
the primary problem of device nodes being arbitrarily assigned
to the actual hardware device, sometimes randomly depending
upon, for example, exactly how a PCI bus gets enumerated.
So, someone with the idea "my system, my rules" and "I don't
want udev messing around" doesn't sound weird to me at all.
I was disappointed when I saw that LFS seemingly ineluctably
was wedded to udev. I see that BLFS has some hints for doing
things without it, but then leaves the sysadmin to his own
devices (no pun intended) thereafter, with a one sentence
mention of mknod.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
