[lkml]   [1998]   [Dec]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: /dev/one - why not /dev/repeat?
    Steve VanDevender wrote:

    [ Stupidity snipped ]

    > Everything you list as examples of "useless bloat" are things
    > that only the kernel can do properly in a multiuser system.

    #1 Serial console? edit /etc/inittab and put a getty on /dev/ttyS0
    #2 /dev/nvram? userlandable
    #3 intird? FS on the HD, or floppy. A custom 'init' will let you compress it.
    #4 romfs? Minix is already there. Use read only mode.

    NONE of these NEED to be in the kernel. They are in there because they work
    BETTER, and offer greater flexablity.

    > The point is that if you want to spew a lot of repeated data into
    > a disk file, writing a small user-space utility to do it will
    > actually be _faster_ (because it doesn't have to read() a block
    > for every write() it does) and quite likely smaller than the
    > amount of extra kernel code needed to implement a pseudodevice.

    THE POINT IS IT IS MUCH MORE FLEXABLE THEN THAT. Get it through your skull.

    -- Linkscape Internet Services 732-541-4214 Linux Router Project

    At 19981216.11:59 Zulu, Mach 1 was broken with a 1.0080162GHz Dual CPU machine.
    I'm the Degenerate Overclocker that did it.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:46    [W:0.023 / U:28.368 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site