From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Apr 19 03:23:48 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id DAA14944
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 19 Apr 1995 03:23:48 -0700
Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.1])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id DAA14937
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 19 Apr 1995 03:23:44 -0700
Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin.Root.COM [198.145.90.18]) by Root.COM (8.6.8/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA28734; Wed, 19 Apr 1995 03:23:42 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.11/8.6.5) with SMTP id DAA00333; Wed, 19 Apr 1995 03:23:42 -0700
Message-Id: <199504191023.DAA00333@corbin.Root.COM>
To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
cc: julian@ref.tfs.com, hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: [DEVFS] your opinions sought! 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 19 Apr 95 03:17:04 PDT."
             <199504191017.DAA00268@corbin.Root.COM> 
From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM>
Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 1995 03:23:41 -0700
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>>>I personally have always prefered the flat scheme of /dev (with possible
>>>exceptions for /dev/fd/*).  This is a religious issue, I have spoken my
>>>religion.
>>
>>I like it fairly flat.  There certainly shouldn't be subdirectories for
>>pieces of one device.
>
>   I agree with Bruce. I would have agreed with Rod, but the simple fact is
>that our /dev directory is getting very large and bloated, and this will only
>get worse. Perhaps /dev/disks/* and /dev/ttys/*, etc, might be a way to
>organize things (in other words, by device class). I prefer to not minimize
                                                              ^^^^^^

   Yikes! ...I edited this message in too much of a hurry! ...I meant "prefer
to minimize".

>the number of levels as much as possible, while still providing some
>organization.
>
>-DG

-DG