Ruminations on Udev, null and console

Bruce Dubbs bruce.dubbs at
Fri Feb 25 19:07:31 PST 2011

alupu at wrote:

> I do have a confusion underlying this thread.
> I have claimed (possibly wrongly), the Udev philosophy assumes a /dev
> absolutely empty.  Are the initial ("metal") null and console nodes
> an LFS specific requirement (based on its particular boot/log sequence
> I tested and confirmed by 2.6.21),
> is it "sanctioned" by Udev developers,
> and/or a "pure" Udev is supposed to start with /dev really empty?

I really don't know.  I didn't get involved with this directly when it 
was being developed four or five years ago.  At the time, I think it was 
needed or we wouldn't have put it in.  Since that time, it may well have 
changed, but (IMO) it's not important enough to change.

   -- Bruce

More information about the lfs-support mailing list