Re: [9front] Pitch for devskel

[Jacob Moody <moody@mail.posixcafe.org>]

On 6/6/22 09:24, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> Quoth Jacob Moody <moody@mail.posixcafe.org>:
>>
>> You _can_ just bind things in to your namespace,
>> and if you did you just wouldn't need auth/box.
>> The point of auth/box is take potentially deeply
>> nested/relative paths and to mimic that hierarchy
>> the the new root. Due to the restriction of devskel
>> to only permit one skeleton per attach. Mimicking some
>> hierarchies can be tedious. This removes that tedium.
> 
> I'm not disagreeing with that; I'm wondering if we can
> drop the device munging part of it, and instead fix
> references to '#'-devs throughout the tree.
> 
Yeah I perfectly content just blocking all devices
unless explicitly stated otherwise(through -e flag).
And yeah, there likely will need to be some code
that directly references devices through '#' in the
tree that we need to clean up.

I will clean up the device inference parts of this
code and rework how mount permissions are specified.


Thanks,
Moody