On 2002.02.21 11:47:01 +0100 mdevin wrote:
OK, I will do that for now. But there must be a way to tell devfs the ownership directly rather than have devfsd fudge them the way you want after. What if you don't run devfsd. devfs is supposed to work without devfsd.
It's possible, apparantly. You may want to take a look at: http://www.atnf.csiro.au/~rgooch/linux/docs/devfs.html#persistencewhich I stumbled on when trying to get devfs to work. I haven't tried this, and was glad I didn't need to. Umm.. this actually brings me to a question: I upgraded my kernel to 2.4.17 from 2.2.something, and after a while found a complaint from noflushd that I had a devfs-enabled kernel, but devfs wasn't on, and so it wouldn't start. I would have expected 'the right thing' to happen automatically. Should it?
To clarify, it would have been nice if either the kernel package had turned on devfs on its own (after asking, of course), or told me I might want to do that.
Matijs.