Re: [PATCH] struct char_device

[Martin Dalecki]

[e-mail] wrote:
> 
> Martin Dalecki writes:
> 
> > Erm... I wasn't talking about the DESIRED state of affairs!
> > I was talking about the CURRENT state of affairs. OK?
> 
> Oh, but in 1995 it was quite possible to compile the kernel
> with kdev_t a pointer type, and I have done it several times since.

Yes I remember but unfortunately some big L* did ignore
your *fine* efforts entierly in favour of developing 
/proc and /dev/random and other crap maybe?

> The kernel keeps growing, so each time it is more work than
> the previous time.
> 
> > At least you have admitted that you where the one responsible
> > for the design of this MESS.
> 
> Thank you! However, you give me too much honour.

Well ... you ask for it in the corresponding header ;-).
But it isn't yours fault indeed I admit...
I know the discussions from memmory since I'm returning REGULARLY to
this
topic in intervals of about between 6 and 24 months since about
maybe already 6 years!!! Currently they have just started to hurt
seriously. And please remember the change I have mentioned above
wasn't intended as developement but just only as an experiment...

Well let's us stop throw flames at each other.
Please have a tight look at the following *EXPERIMENT* I have
already done. It's really really only intended to mark the
places where the full mess shows it's ugly head:

http://www.dalecki.de/big-002.diff