‘esmith’ asked about udev/hotplug in contrast to FreeBSD-5′s devfs, listing these links for more info.
I never did like udev.
It seems to me that something like devfs is a better solution as when you rebuild your kernel, the correct device nodes for that kernel are automatically generated.
Not like it’s ever been hard to run MAKEDEV, and sure thing udev would be simpler still, but I’ve seen both MAKEDEV and udev bork things before, and I think it would take a real brain fart on the part of a kernel coder to make the same happen with devfs.
Using FreeBSD 5.x for the very long time and still, I will have to agree with you about that I like devfs better. I think it’s a better solution, too.
The point of udev is to provide “persistant naming”. For example, if I plug in my USB keydrive with udev set up correctly, it will symlink the device file that udev generates to /dev/keydrive. By doing this, it simplifies writing lines in /etc/fstab. This makes it easier for USB and PCMCIA attached devices to be given persistant naming and allows users to mount them without needing to su or bug root.
DragonFly BSD Digest