Re: Why side-effects on open(2) are evil. (was Re: [RFD w/info-PATCH]device arguments from lookup)
Daniel Phillips (email@example.com)
Tue, 22 May 2001 18:51:20 +0200
On Tuesday 22 May 2001 17:24, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > On Monday 21 May 2001 19:16, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> > > What I'd like to see:
> > >
> > > - An interface for registering an array of related devices
> > > (almost always two: raw and ctl) and their legacy device numbers
> > > with a single userspace callout that does whatever /dev/ creation
> > > needs to be done. Thus, naming and permissions live in user
> > > space. No "device node is also a directory" weirdness...
> > Could you be specific about what is weird about it?
>[general sense of unease]
> I don't think it's likely to be even workable. Just consider the
> directory entry for a moment - is it going to be marked d or [cb]?
It's going to be marked 'd', it's a directory, not a file.
> If it doesn't have the directory bit set, Midnight commander won't
> let me look at it, and I wouldn't blame cd or ls for complaining. If it
> does have the 'd' bit set, I wouldn't blame cp, tar, find, or a
> million other programs if they did the wrong thing. They've had 30
> years to expect that files aren't directories. They're going to act
No problem, it's a directory.
> Linus has been kicking this idea around for a couple years now and
> it's still a cute solution looking for a problem. It just doesn't
> belong in UNIX.
Hmm, ok, do we still have any *technical* reasons?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/