Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!att!ulysses!ulysses.att.com!ekrell
From: ekrell@ulysses.att.com (Eduardo Krell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: (was slashes, now NFS devices)
Message-ID: <14363@ulysses.att.com>
Date: 23 Feb 91 20:30:48 GMT
References: <thurlow.666756073@convex.convex.com> <15236@smoke.brl.mil> <123382@uunet.UU.NET> <1991Feb22.141910.17013@decuac.dec.com> <BZS.91Feb22163556@world.std.com>
Sender: netnews@ulysses.att.com
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs
Lines: 18

In article <BZS.91Feb22163556@world.std.com> bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:

[about NFS special files]

>Obviously they should be interpreted
>relative to the local host only.

Not so obvious to me. After all, the server is probably the only machine
which can interpret the meaning of that special file in a sensible way.
By forcing a local interpretation of special files, you lose the ability
to access remote devices.

If you can access remote files, why can't you access remote devices using
the same mechanism? Under RFS, special files are interpreted by the server.
    
Eduardo Krell                   AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ

UUCP: {att,decvax,ucbvax}!ulysses!ekrell  Internet: ekrell@ulysses.att.com


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com