[BusyBox] off topic: 'device table support' for mkcramfs?

[Jonas Holmberg]

> What surprises me a bit is the fact that file permissions  cannot  be
> specified  that  way.  It  should  be trivial to add, so is there any
> reason you didn't do this?

No reason, we just never needed it since we used the permission of the actual file instead. Our implementation of metafiles requires the actual file to exist. So to create a device-file there must be an regular file with the same name, and the permission on that file is used by mkcramfs.

But, as you say, it would be trivial to add it.

/Jonas