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

Re: replacing makedev

Fair enough.  Really, the point is to know what they did, reuse the
good and redo the bad.

On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 07:39:03PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> It's only 800 or so lines; it's pretty basic.  Basing it off redhat
> isn't really necessary.  There's also a bit of cruft in the redhat
> version.  I'd end up stripping out stuff, changing stuff, etc; it would
> get to the point where I'd have been better off just starting from
> scratch.
> On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 03:53:17PM -0700, elf@buici.com wrote:
> > 
> > If RH already uses /etc/makedev.d, why not start with their
> > application?
> > 
> > On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 06:16:04PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > > Looking at redhat's makedev, they have device nodes in /etc/makedev.d,
> > > so that packages can simply add files to that directory to create new
> > > devices.  This is the way debian seems to do things in other cases, and
> > > would be a good thing to do, imo.  So, I've started rewriting it in C,
> > > to have it use /etc/makedev.d.
> -- 
> Broad surveillance is a mark of bad security.
> 	-- Bruce Schneier

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: