On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:25:24AM +, Freminlins typed:
> Kris,
>
> On 29/01/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >To put it bluntly, it's something you're just going to have to get
> >over :-)
>
>
> That's unhelpful. It is, in my opinion, a bad idea to have to mount up 140
Ruben,
On 31/01/07, Ruben de Groot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not exactly. Solaris, especially Solaris 10 is relying more and more on
pseudo filesystems.
# uname -srpi
SunOS 5.10 sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-V210
# mount | grep '^/devices'
/devices on /devices read/write/setuid/devices/dev=47c on T
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:25:24AM +, Freminlins wrote:
> Kris,
>
> On 29/01/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >To put it bluntly, it's something you're just going to have to get
> >over :-)
>
>
> That's unhelpful. It is, in my opinion, a bad idea to have to mount up 140
Kris,
On 29/01/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To put it bluntly, it's something you're just going to have to get
over :-)
That's unhelpful. It is, in my opinion, a bad idea to have to mount up 1400
instances of devfs just to get a few device nodes. It just doesn't seem
right.
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 01:07:25PM +, Freminlins wrote:
> Kris,
>
> On 28/01/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >I not understand this no sentence :)
>
>
> Sorry, I didn't read what I typed. I meant to type "Was the effect of this
> considered at all?"
Yes it was. The b
Kris,
On 28/01/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I not understand this no sentence :)
Sorry, I didn't read what I typed. I meant to type "Was the effect of this
considered at all?"
What reasons, other than cosmetic, do you have for not wanting to do
this?
Well, I am sure you
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 03:56:29PM +, Freminlins wrote:
> Kris,
>
> On 26/01/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >Sorry, it's the only way.
>
>
> Was the considered at all?
I not understand this no sentence :)
> There's simply no way that I would mount up 1400
> devfs. It
Kris,
On 26/01/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry, it's the only way.
Was the considered at all? There's simply no way that I would mount up 1400
devfs. It is a backward step.
Kris
Frem.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mail
On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:37PM +, Freminlins wrote:
> Kris,
>
> On 26/01/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Set up and mount numerous devfs file systems ;)
>
>
> That is exactly what I am trying to avoid. One of the servers has 1400 sites
> on it, and I really don't want
Kris,
On 26/01/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Set up and mount numerous devfs file systems ;)
That is exactly what I am trying to avoid. One of the servers has 1400 sites
on it, and I really don't want 1400 devfs mounts. If the only way to do this
now is by having so many devfs
On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 04:40:24PM +, Freminlins wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a web server still running FreeBSD 4.7 which I want to update to
> FreeBSD 6.2. There are quite a few sites on this machine, and each of them
> has a chroot containing their own /dev. In their /dev are things like null
11 matches
Mail list logo
