Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 20:47:08 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, terry@lambert.org, current@FreeBSD.org, julian@ref.tfs.com, phk@critter.tfs.com, scrappy@ki.net Subject: Re: PATCH: small, syntax changes for devfs Message-ID: <199603230347.UAA04429@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199603230129.MAA01156@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Mar 23, 96 12:29:49 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> I prefer a flat namespace. > > >Why? > > - it's easier to search. > - existing programs depend on it. > - it forces you to choose short unambiguous names in a consistent way. > This is most important for tty names. > > I think a layered namespace would need to have zillions of links to > a flat namespace to avoid these problems. Counterexamples: 1) /dev/pty/000 (a cloning pty device driver instead of fixed allocation and a kernel rebuild). 2) A physical device with a changer with a DOS partition table on one of the spindles, with an extended partition on one of the partitions with a BSD disklabel on one of the extended partitions... Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603230347.UAA04429>