[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Larger dev_t
Martin Dalecki wrote:
> >
> > devfs -- in the abstract -- really isn't that bad of an idea; after all,
> Devfs is from a desing point of view the duplication for the bad /proc
> design for devices. If you need a good design for general device
> handling with names - network interfaces are the thing too look at.
> mount() should be more like a select()... accept()!

And what on earth makes this better? I have always thought the socket
interface to be hideously ugly and full of ad-hockery. Its abstractions
for handle multiple address families by and large don't work, and it
introduces new system calls left, right and center -- sometimes for good
reasons, but please do tell me why I can't open() an AF_UNIX socket, but
have to use a special system call called connect() instead.


<> at work, <> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:18    [W:0.187 / U:1.296 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site