[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: New shmfs and Debian


I think this should put the shm filesystem thread to rest:

----- Forwarded message from bert hubert <ahu@ds9a.nl> -----

Date: 	Tue, 4 Apr 2000 12:46:29 +0200
From: bert hubert <ahu@ds9a.nl>
To: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: Shmem filesystem? DevFS?  Why.
Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre4i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0004040008590.2245-100000@winds.org>; from gandalf@winds.org on Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 12:53:25AM -0400
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: 	majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing-dig

On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 12:53:25AM -0400, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
> Was looking over the 2.3.99 differences (versus 2.3.40) and came across a few
> people having to create a /var/shm in order to do anything shared-memory. Why
> do we need a increasing number of virtual filesystems these days to please the
> kernel? Whatever happened to just having good old /proc and kernel-level

We soon won't anymore - Al Viros 'single' mount option allows the kernel to
work an 'unmounted' filesystem.


bert hubert.

                       |              http://www.rent-a-nerd.nl
                       |                     - U N I X -
                       |          Inspice et cautus eris - D11T'95

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/

----- End forwarded message -----

Neal Walfield                                              neal@walfield.org
UMass Lowell - Fox 1512                                  Phone: 978-934-5347
                                                           Fax: 603-415-3645
Love is the triumph of imagination over intelligence.
                -- H. L. Mencken

Reply to: