[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: LANANA: To Pending Device Number Registrants
    > Big device numbers are _not_ a solution. I will accept a 32-bit one, but
    > no more, and I will _not_ accept a "manage by hand" approach any more. The
    > time has long since come to say "No". Which I've done. If you can't make
    > it manage the thing automatically with a script, you won't get a hardcoded
    > major device number just because you're lazy.

    And on that issue I'm so convinced you are wrong I'm prepared to maintain
    sensible Unix device behaviour in the -ac pretty much indefinitely.

    > End of discussion.

    And that is precisely why ....

    Abstract device file systems are beautiful concepts but they don't solve
    the device name space problem and they introduce hideous incompatibilities
    with existing software. Plan 9 is beautiful. It has a userbase approximately
    the size of Linux 0.12 - because it is not compatible.


    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 12:53    [W:2.222 / U:0.308 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site