On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Werner Almesberger wrote:
> Roman Zippel wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 22:10:11 +0200 (CEST)
> > Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 23:57:56 +0200 (CEST)
> > Ok, Peter refuses to give me an answer to that,
> That was a quick conclusion, after less than two hours :-)
I should have inserted a "privately" there, because there a few mails and
even a small irc conversation inbetween.
> Anyway, I agree with your general concern. It only seems good
> engineering practice to also look at the numbering schemes that
> are supposed to go with the device number enlargement.
> Or, alternatively, to make sure that it's trivial to make further
> enlargements (or shrinkages), if the need for them should arise.
> I didn't look at the issue in detail, but perhaps the latter is
> the case ?
It was really a mistake from Peter to point me to the archives, it's
really amazing to how much crap from the static device number crew had to
be objected by Linus and Al.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/