lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    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.

    -hpa

    --
    <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
    "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
    http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:18    [W:2.953 / U:0.108 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site