Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: possible SCSI device numbering solution | Date | Tue, 25 Jun 1996 10:01:29 -0400 (EDT) | From | "Andrew E. Mileski" <> |
| |
> > I'm reminded of somebody saying, "they'll never need more than 640k". :-/ > > > > But anyhoot, 16/48 bit majors/minors seems reasonable to me. > > Of course, this is a blind guess - we really should discuss how > > majors/minors will be assigned and used first. We could easily gobble up > > 128-bits with a poor system, or, improve the current one and stick with > > 16-bits. > > any idea how the "ls -l" output should look like for larger dev_t ? > > crw-r----- 1 root kmem 1, 2 Aug 29 1992 /dev/kmem > brw-rw---- 1 root root 65535, 281474976710655 Apr 1 2001 /dev/last_dev_16_48 > brw-rw---- 1 root root 4294967295, 4294967295 Apr 1 2001 /dev/last_dev_32_32 > brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 0 May 4 1994 /dev/sda > > doesn't look too nice ;-) > > Harald
Does anybody have a problem with a custom 'ls' using hex?
-- Andrew E. Mileski mailto:aem@ott.hookup.net My home page http://www.redhat.com/~aem/ Linux Plug-and-Play Project Leader. See URL http://www.redhat.com/pnp/
Red Hat Software sponsors these pages - I have no other affilitation with Red Hat Software, and I have never used any of their products.
|  |