From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ei2pF-0002Iy-P6 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 02 Dec 2005 04:47:14 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jB24k81a024115; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 04:46:08 GMT Received: from perch.kroah.org (mail.kroah.org [69.55.234.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jB24hlAi015447 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 04:43:48 GMT Received: from [192.168.0.10] (c-24-22-115-24.hsd1.or.comcast.net [24.22.115.24]) (authenticated) by perch.kroah.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id jB24hkL17766 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 20:43:46 -0800 Received: from greg by echidna.kroah.org with local (masqmail 0.2.19) id 1Ei2lg-1aA-00 for ; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 20:43:32 -0800 Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 20:43:32 -0800 From: Greg KH To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] contents of /dev after initial installation Message-ID: <20051202044331.GA5732@kroah.com> References: <1133490923.15611.31.camel@sputnik886.ruz-net> <20051202024755.0203586d@localhost> <20051202034459.GB2550@ols-dell.iic.hokudai.ac.jp> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051202034459.GB2550@ols-dell.iic.hokudai.ac.jp> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: a17993eb-7651-453e-ab8d-eef5759d9288 X-Archives-Hash: bff1d4d48c2ed34aa6fcc5cc63f8cd0e On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 12:45:00PM +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote: > maillog: 02/12/2005-02:47:55(+0000): Stephen Bennett types > > On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 03:35:23 +0100 > > Matthias Langer wrote: > > > > > revealed that there are in fact hundrets of premade device nodes in > > > the /dev directory. And this is not only true for the box where i > > > discovered this, which was brought up from a 2004.x cd, but also true > > > for the box where i just installed gentoo from 2005.1-r1. > > > > > > Is there any reason for this ? > > > > Not all systems use udev or devfs. Plus, it's nice to be able to boot > > the system when your dynamic /dev management fails for whatever reason. > > I don't need a fully populated /dev to get a working shell with > init=/bin/bash on the kernel cmdline. And at that point it is easy to > run /dev/MAKEDEV and get whatever devices are needed for > troubleshooting. > > I of course assume that if the dynamic /dev management fails, then we > need to *recover* instead of trying to get the system up as usual. And I > also assume that the init scripts will anyway tell me "fatal error: give > root password for maintenance or Ctrl-D to continue" if I have something > vital missing from /dev. If udev fails, and you have a completly empty /dev, you will not get any console output at all for this type of message to be shown :( So it's better to be safe than sorry. That being said, my boxes have an empty /dev... thanks, greg k-h -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list