Re: With udev, are dev and MAKEDEV still required?
David T Hollis schrieb:
On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 23:07 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:15:34 -0400, David T Hollis
><dhollis(a)davehollis.com> wrote:
>
>
>>With udev now handling /dev and repopulating upon reboot, it seems that
>>the dev and MAKEDEV packages are no longer relevant.
>>
>>
>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=130746
>
>I'm not sure its safe to say the static dev packages are completely
>irrelevant now.
>
>
>
In looking into the dev requirement for which (which struck me as quite
odd), I found this bug report:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99275 . The which
package needs dev so that the postinstall scripts calling install-info
can use "> /dev/null". There were ordering problems with 'which'
being
installed before 'dev' since 'which' doesn't have much in the way of
requirements. I suppose it may be better to have a requirement
on /dev/null, though currently only 'dev' provides it. If there is a
future without 'dev' (optional or mandatory), that sort of scenario will
need to be addressed.
does /dev/null exists when using udev?