Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 11:38:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> To: marcel@xcllnt.net Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [TEST/REVIEW/HEADSUP] tty drivers mega-patch Message-ID: <200407141839.i6EIcvce025710@gw.catspoiler.org> In-Reply-To: <20040714180816.GA5503@dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14 Jul, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 12:04:57PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> I would prefer to stick to the "tty" and "cua" prefixes however. > > I can agree on the tty prefix. I've always disliked the cua prefix, > simply because it's nonsensical. It's the kind of prefix you pick > when all the good (and bad) ones have been used and you randomly > grab 3 letters from your scrabble box, sigh, and accept that once > again luck hasn't been on your side :-) :-) > > Seriously: the origin of cua is mostly lost and systems like UUCP > have already been removed from the source tree. Anybody new to > FreeBSD and who hasn't been around since the epoch will completely > fail to see why the device is called the way it is. I still use cu(1), though I don't know why the man page suggests using the /dev/ttyXX device. The /etc/remote file uses the cua device.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200407141839.i6EIcvce025710>