cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/alpha mem.c src/sys/alpha/conf GENERIC src/sys/alpha/include memdev.h src/sys/amd64/amd64 io.c mem.c src/sys/amd64/conf GENERIC NOTES src/sys/amd64/include iodev.h memdev.h src/sys/conf NOTES files files.alpha files.amd64 ...

[Alexey Dokuchaev]

On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 04:00:00PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Sunday 01 August 2004 07:40 am, Mark Murray wrote:
> > markm       2004-08-01 11:40:54 UTC
> >
> >   FreeBSD src repository
> >
> >   Modified files:
> >     sys/alpha/alpha      mem.c
> >     sys/alpha/conf       GENERIC
> >     sys/amd64/amd64      mem.c
> >     sys/amd64/conf       GENERIC NOTES
> >     sys/conf             NOTES files files.alpha files.amd64
> >                          files.i386 files.ia64 files.pc98
> >                          files.sparc64
> > [ ... ]
> 
> Why in the world are /dev/null and /dev/zero optional?  /dev/[k]mem 
> and /dev/io I can accept for those with uber-high security paranoia, but I 
> can't think of any good reason to have a kernel without /dev/null 
> and /dev/zero.  To me it seems that this creates way more foot shooting 
> potential than benefit.  It's one thing to have device drivers for hardware 
> that may or may not be present optional, but /dev/null and /dev/zero do not 
> fall into that case.

OTOH, if someone wants to build mega-tight kernel image with everything
possible taken out by modules, modularizing /dev/null and /dev/zero
might make some sence.  We already have /dev/random as a module anyways.

./danfe