On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 06:32:59AM -0600, Brook Milligan wrote:
> I was hoping to run a read-only root. In that case, isn't tmpfs /dev
> the right solution?
I don't think it is needed, but of course it also should work.
But this is the easy way to track it down: remove the bogus /dev/null,
turn
On Jul 6, 2015, at 1:02 AM, Martin Husemann wrote:
> Yes - and good question (but now probably easier to spot).
> However (and this maybe a stupid question): why are you using the domU with
> tmpfs /dev for production?
I was hoping to run a read-only root. In that case, isn't tmpfs /dev the right
On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 09:04:47PM -0600, Brook Milligan wrote:
> Does this mean that something is writing to the DOMU /dev/null after
> the tmpfs is unmounted? What could that be?
Yes - and good question (but now probably easier to spot).
However (and this maybe a stupid question): why are you
On Jun 26, 2015, at 1:07 AM, Martin Husemann wrote:
> I don't get it - we are talking about the case where init finds no
> /dev/console, so it mounts a tmpfs on /dev and then (on the empty tmpfs)
> runs MAKEDEV ?
>
> Where does /dev/null get created if not inside MAKEDEV then? Or is
> the tmpfs m
In article <20150626070723.gb...@mail.duskware.de>,
Martin Husemann wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 02:15:44PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> On Jun 25, 12:06pm, br...@nmsu.edu (Brook Milligan) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: dynamically created /dev/null is a regular file
>
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 02:15:44PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Jun 25, 12:06pm, br...@nmsu.edu (Brook Milligan) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: dynamically created /dev/null is a regular file
>
> | On Jun 25, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> | > Why isn't
On Wednesday 24 Jun 2015 16:43:17 Brook Milligan wrote:
> I have been installing some -current systems (cvs from 201505311600Z to be
> exact) that dynamically construct /dev when booting. This seems to be the
> default behavior of rc when /dev is effectively empty. The problem is that
> /dev/null
On Jun 25, 12:06pm, br...@nmsu.edu (Brook Milligan) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: dynamically created /dev/null is a regular file
| On Jun 25, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > Why isn't MAKEDEV invoked with -f?
|
| Are you asking why we don't apply a patch like the followin
On Jun 25, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Why isn't MAKEDEV invoked with -f?
Are you asking why we don't apply a patch like the following?
-- sbin/init.c.orig 2015-06-25 12:02:34.0 -0600
+++ sbin/init.c 2015-06-25 12:03:28.0 -0600
@@ -1709,7 +1709,7 @@
In article <30812ca8-ff63-4c48-b455-030384053...@nmsu.edu>,
Brook Milligan wrote:
>On Jun 24, 2015, at 10:37 PM, David Holland wrote:
>>> Is this related to kern/33023?
>>
>> It might be; but given that this mode gets used a fair amount, and
>> also that the device should be getting created in t
On Jun 24, 2015, at 10:37 PM, David Holland wrote:
>> Is this related to kern/33023?
>
> It might be; but given that this mode gets used a fair amount, and
> also that the device should be getting created in the top of the
> unionfs, I would guess more likely not.
I'm not actually using unionfs,
On Thu, 25 Jun 2015, David Holland wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 04:43:17PM -0600, Brook Milligan wrote:
> I have been installing some -current systems (cvs from
> 201505311600Z to be exact) that dynamically construct /dev when
> booting. This seems to be the default behavior of rc when /dev i
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 04:43:17PM -0600, Brook Milligan wrote:
> I have been installing some -current systems (cvs from
> 201505311600Z to be exact) that dynamically construct /dev when
> booting. This seems to be the default behavior of rc when /dev is
> effectively empty. The problem is th
I have been installing some -current systems (cvs from 201505311600Z to be
exact) that dynamically construct /dev when booting. This seems to be the
default behavior of rc when /dev is effectively empty. The problem is that
/dev/null routinely ends up being a regular file not a device file. H
14 matches
Mail list logo
