Message-Id:	<200411031542.iA3FggHN008060@delorie.com>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From:	"Chris January" <chris AT atomice DOT net>
To:	<cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	RE: ls /dev/*
Date:	Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:42:34 -0000
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20041103151818.GE31627@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
X-Antivirus-Scanner:	Clean mail though you should still use an Antivirus
X-AntiAbuse:	This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse:	Primary Hostname - biro.nothard.net
X-AntiAbuse:	Original Domain - cygwin.com
X-AntiAbuse:	Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse:	Sender Address Domain - atomice.net
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Note-from-DJ:	This may be spam

> On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 09:08:44AM -0000, Chris January wrote:
> >> > * Christopher Faylor
> >> <pts-ab-crefbany-ercyl-cyrnfr AT pltjva DOT pbz> [2004-11-02 
> 15:01:13 -0500]:
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 02:55:39PM -0500, Sam Steingold wrote:
> >> >>why isn't /dev a more "usual" directory?
> >> >>cd /dev, ls /dev all fail, while
> >> >>cat /dev/clipboard works.
> >> >
> >> > No one has implemented the special handling required for 
> /dev which 
> >> > would enable things like opendir/readdir or cd to work.
> >> 
> >> Thanks, I guessed that much.  I also know about "PTC".
> >> (fhandler_proc.cc is too long,
> >> I guess fhandler_dev.cc would be just as long, and I suspect that 
> >> fhandler_dev.cc is not the only this missing).
> >> 
> >> Is this on anyone's TODO list?
> >Actually it's not that difficult. I've already implemented 
> it once. See 
> >this
> >patch:
> >http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2002-q2/msg00191.html
> >It was due to be merged sometime around 1.3.12 but I think I and the 
> >maintainers forgot about it. Feel free to update the patch to latest 
> >CVS and re-submit it.
> 
> Actually, please don't.  I think you misinterpret the 
> discussion in cygwin-developers.  Now that you've 
> reacquainted me with the discussion, I remember why it wasn't 
> applied as-is.  My plan was for /dev to go away as a special 
> mount.  Now that mknod works, this is more doable than it was in 2002.
Ah yes - I remember now why it wasn't committed in the first place.

Chris


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -