Re: What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-12 Thread Daniel C. Sobral
Terry Lambert wrote: "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote: >>"device cloning" is really a wrong name for this, and I regret that >>I every used that term. "On demand device creation" is closer, >>but it doesn't have any sort of ring to it. > >Worst of all, "device cloning" is one of Terry's buzzwords. :-) A

Re: What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Terry Lambert
"Daniel C. Sobral" wrote: > > "device cloning" is really a wrong name for this, and I regret that > > I every used that term. "On demand device creation" is closer, > > but it doesn't have any sort of ring to it. > > Worst of all, "device cloning" is one of Terry's buzzwords. :-) Actually, it's

Re: What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Daniel C. Sobral
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ruslan Ermilov writes: Because of "device cloning"; devices are created on demand. "device cloning" is really a wrong name for this, and I regret that I every used that term. "On demand device creation" is closer, but it doesn't have any

Re: What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Bradley T Hughes
On Tuesday 11 March 2003 17:06, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: [snip] > "device cloning" is really a wrong name for this, and I regret that > I every used that term. "On demand device creation" is closer, > but it doesn't have any sort of ring to it. ... but "device on demand" does have a ring to it :)

Re: What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ruslan Ermilov writes: >Because of "device cloning"; devices are created on demand. "device cloning" is really a wrong name for this, and I regret that I every used that term. "On demand device creation" is closer, but it doesn't have any sort of ring to it. --

Re: What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 04:41:54PM +0100, Flag_reda wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 04:14:08PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > Try "ls -l /dev/bpf0" instead, etc. Beware of DEVFS surprises. :-) > > It works > > But, why it works like this?!?!? > > /me confused =P > Because of "devi

Re: What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Flag_reda
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 04:14:08PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > Try "ls -l /dev/bpf0" instead, etc. Beware of DEVFS surprises. :-) It works But, why it works like this?!?!? /me confused =P -- Paolo To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current"

Re: What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 02:07:04PM +0100, Paolo Pisati wrote: > > Added device bpf to my kernel config file, make a buildkenel&installkernel, > rebooted but there's not bpf in /dev: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] flag]$ grep bpf /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/SOUTHCROSS > device bpf # Berkele

What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Paolo Pisati
Added device bpf to my kernel config file, make a buildkenel&installkernel, rebooted but there's not bpf in /dev: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flag]$ grep bpf /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/SOUTHCROSS device bpf # Berkeley packet filter [EMAIL PROTECTED] flag]$ uname -a FreeBSD southcross.skyne

What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Paolo Pisati
Added device bpf to my kernel config file, make a buildkenel&installkernel, rebooted but there's not bpf in /dev: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flag]$ grep bpf /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/SOUTHCROSS device bpf # Berkeley packet filter [EMAIL PROTECTED] flag]$ uname -a FreeBSD southcross.skyne

What's happened to bpf?

2003-03-11 Thread Paolo Pisati
Added device bpf to my kernel config file, make a buildkenel&installkernel, rebooted but there's not bpf in /dev: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flag]$ grep bpf /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/SOUTHCROSS device bpf # Berkeley packet filter [EMAIL PROTECTED] flag]$ uname -a FreeBSD southcross.skyne