Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 22 May 2001 12:49:12 -0500 (CDT) | | From | Oliver Xymoron <> | | Subject | Re: Why side-effects on open(2) are evil. (was Re: [RFD w/info-PATCH]device arguments from lookup) |
| |
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > I don't think it's likely to be even workable. Just consider the > > directory entry for a moment - is it going to be marked d or [cb]? > > It's going to be marked 'd', it's a directory, not a file.
Are we talking about the same proposal? The one where I can open /dev/dsp and /dev/dsp/ctl? But I can still do 'cat /dev/hda > /dev/dsp'?
It's still a file. If it's not a file anymore, it ain't UNIX.
> > If it doesn't have the directory bit set, Midnight commander won't > > let me look at it, and I wouldn't blame cd or ls for complaining. If it > > does have the 'd' bit set, I wouldn't blame cp, tar, find, or a > > million other programs if they did the wrong thing. They've had 30 > > years to expect that files aren't directories. They're going to act > > weird. > > No problem, it's a directory. > > > Linus has been kicking this idea around for a couple years now and > > it's still a cute solution looking for a problem. It just doesn't > > belong in UNIX. > > Hmm, ok, do we still have any *technical* reasons?
If you define *technical* to not include design, sure. Oh, did I mention unnecessary, solvable in userspace?
-- "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.."
- 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/
|  |