Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 1 Apr 2003 01:42:40 +0200 (CEST) | From | Roman Zippel <> | Subject | Re: 64-bit kdev_t - just for playing |
| |
Hi,
On 31 Mar 2003, Alan Cox wrote:
> > 2. What compromises can we make for 2.6? > > Defaulting char devices to 256 minors and a lot of space so stuff doesnt > break. Viro has done the block stuff and we have the scope to do sane > stuff like /dev/disk/.. for all disks now.
What do you mean with "a lot of space so stuff doesnt break"?
> > Without answering these questions now, we risk to pay heavily for it > > later. The ones who ask now for a larger dev_t the loudest are likely the > > first to demand later not change anything for "compability", because they > > hardcoded certain assumptions about dev_t into their applications. > > Glibc already has a bigger dev_t
and a broken mknod implementation...
bye, Roman
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |