[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:0.019 / U:4.144 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site