Re: Locking of serial devices and devfs
On Thursday 21 June 2001 16:31, Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> Le jeu, jun 21, 2001, à 04:09:53 +0200, Wichert Akkerman a écrit:
> > Previously Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> > > ... until one uses a lean version of devfs, which doesn't have
> > > these numbers, but just uses the pathname instead. Why design for a
> > > fragile system ? Device names aren't going away.
> >
> > Using just names you loose since a single device can show up as
> > multiple names.
>
> Hmmm... then, we have hardlinks and inodes. Can't we index by inode,
> then ?
mknod tts/0 c 4 64
mknod ttyS0 c 4 64
Two different inodes for the same device!
Also you are not forced to keep all your device nodes on the same file
system. Different devices could have the same inode number! But that
could be worked around by adding the block device ID for the file system
to the lock file name, which means that you're back to using major/minor
numbers in the lock file name!
--
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: