Symlinks under /proc
Mon Jan 31 20:47:00 GMT 2005
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 09:30:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Jan 31 21:23, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Jan 31 15:11, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 09:04:57PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> > Have we reached the point yet where we can just get rid of special /dev
>> > handling entirely? Maybe we could just add /dev population to setup.exe
>> > or even have cygwin1.dll itself run a program if it detects an unpopulated
>> > /dev, sort of like how udev is handled in linux now.
>> > My only reservation with doing things this way is that we'd be making
>> > cygwin perform a disk lookup every time someone wanted to get to open
>> > /dev/tty.
>> I would not like to change that yet. So far, the DLL is still basically
>> self-sufficient. If you require on-disk devices, you can't use the DLL
>> anymore without having a minimal installation process. I can see the
>> point where I'm getting convinced that exactly that is a good idea, but
>> right now...
>Actually, couldn't we just keep /dev/console, /dev/tty* and /dev/null
>handled internally? Everything else seems rather non-critical.
You don't even have to do that. AFAICT, there is no reason for the DLL
to have to parse "/dev/tty*" or "/dev/null" when it could just be
relying on using major and minor device numbers.
I just quickly hacked cygwin to stop parsing /dev entirely and it
seems to work ok, for the most part. The one puzzler is that while
it deals ok with /dev/tty, it does not handle /dev/null correctly,
even after a /dev/null has been created.
More information about the Cygwin-developers