On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 12:19:47PM -0400, Nalin Dahyabhai wrote: > On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 06:40:22AM -0400, Alan Cox wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 04:57:55AM +0200, Enrico Scholz wrote: > > > A problem with MAKEDEV is, that it places the MAKEDEV *binary* into > > > /dev. This is a really bad place for it; devfs under 2.4 removed it and > > > buildsystems which need a special /dev will remove it also. > > > > Unix tradition is the essential reason for this. Nothing more. > > The wording in FHS [1] seems a bit vague about this case. Opinions? Looks ok to me. It belongs there unless it isnt needed. Since udev doesn't create every possible device in every configuration I see no harm putting it there.
