Re: Larger dev_t

Bart Trojanowski
2001-04-03T15:37:46Z

On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Wayne.Brown@altec.com wrote:

> Ingo Oeser <ingo.oeser@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de> wrote:
>
> >Yes: Let "mknod /dev/foo [bc] x y" die!
>
> I hope this never happens. Improving the major/minor device scheme is
> reasonable; abandoning it would be a sad occurrence. It would make Linux too
> "un-UNIXish" (how's THAT for an an ugly neologism!) for my tastes.

I don't know... the command 'mknod' should probably remain for
compatibility reasons. But the way that it does create the node can be
completely different. For example the call could just be a wrapper to a
syscall or a write to a proc file.

I think Ingo had qualms with the process of creating of a device file
which is totally detached of the kernel's ability to service that device.

But I am with you. The compatibility between *NIX should not be severed
so fast.

B.

--
WebSig: http://www.jukie.net/~bart/sig/