Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-31,: Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)

# Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)

Kragen (kragen@pobox.com)
Fri, 7 Aug 1998 11:22:28 -0400 (EDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Ragnar Hojland Espinosa: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"
- Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: Antw: Re: CIPE - Encrypted IP Encapsulation"
- In reply to: Richard Gooch: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"
- Next in thread: Michael Shields: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"

On Fri, 7 Aug 1998, Richard Gooch wrote:
> I do think that major&minor numbers are conceptually a dirty hack. To
> me it looks like a quick and dirty way of supporting devices in an
> area where there was only one FS. The solution to device files may
> have been very different if Unix had a VFS right from the start. Who
> knows.

It would appear that you are correct; the folks who designed Unix used
something very similar to devfs when they designed Plan9.

Kragen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

- Next message: Ragnar Hojland Espinosa: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"
- Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: Antw: Re: CIPE - Encrypted IP Encapsulation"
- In reply to: Richard Gooch: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"
- Next in thread: Michael Shields: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"