> > On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 07:57:55PM +0400, Borsenkow Andrej wrote: > > > > MAKEDEV does not conflict with devfs. For almost a year already. Binary > > lives in /sbin and /dev has only link. > > OK. But still, why do I want to install/run MAKEDEV when I am using > devfs? > > > Thierry said he has solution for /dev. But, folks, just how often do you > > need to update /dev? It is the second time in more than half a year. > > C'mon, you can boot without devfs _as_ often :-) > > Ditto for dev. Why install it when I am using devfs? >
So add them to skip.list as I suggested. You _do_ need functional /dev because you _may_ need to boot without devfs (for several months I kept linux-nodevfs because of mysterious hangs on startup - seems like people already forgot about all problems we had :) You do need /dev if you are running kernel-secure that is built without devfs. Once more - you do need /dev available - you do not normally update dev on released versions and allowing dev update with devfs is not trivial (but definitely possible) so time needed to implement and test it is not justified. - if you run cooker you can twice a year boot without devfs :-) -andrej If you really want to fix this issue - I posted several times how it can be done. I may explain it once more.
