[lkml]   [1998]   [Sep]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectTreat UDI like STREAMS ?
Alan writes:
> Im not interested in UDI ...

Perhaps the kernel could treat UDI like it treats STREAMS - not
included in the kernel sources proper, but has the hooks to
accommodate the UDI framework as a loadable module? So UDI
would be available to those with a distinct need, but not the
officially sanctioned "Linux Way (tm)".

As best I can tell, the only STREAMS-specific hooks provided
by the kernel are the {get,put}pmsg() syscall table entries -
the couple other changes were things that made just sense to
do, with or without STREAMS. UDI would probably not even need
this (syscall) level of kernel/user UDI-specific accommodation.

Accommodation (not inclusion) of a loadable UDI framework by the
kernel could similarly be "earned" by the UDI piece by its using
only extant kernel facilities, or by persuading acceptance of any
needed additional facilities on the basis of general merit (as
opposed to saying "This has to be in to support UDI"). Added
hooks would have to stand on their own merit.


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 13:44    [W:0.106 / U:3.508 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site