From owner-freebsd-hardware  Thu Apr 20 10:38:49 1995
Return-Path: hardware-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id KAA03079
          for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 10:38:49 -0700
Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id KAA03072
          ; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 10:38:46 -0700
Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1)
	id AA25502; Thu, 20 Apr 95 11:31:57 MDT
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
Message-Id: <9504201731.AA25502@cs.weber.edu>
Subject: Re: [DEVFS] your opinions sought!
To: tanel@juku.li.ttu.ee (Tanel Kuusk)
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 95 11:31:57 MDT
Cc: jkh@freefall.cdrom.com, julian@freefall.cdrom.com, fs@freefall.cdrom.com,
        hackers@freefall.cdrom.com, hardware@freefall.cdrom.com
In-Reply-To: <9504200513.AA19017@juku.li.ttu.ee> from "Tanel Kuusk" at Apr 20, 95 08:13:57 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52]
Sender: hardware-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > > /dev/ptm/...		master pty
> > > /dev/pts/...		slave pty
> > 
> > I think these could be better named.  /dev/pty/{m,s}/?
>
> Well, /dev/pts/... is more like SVR4 does. BTW, are we talking about normal
> /dev here or something like Sun's /devices?

Yes, it's more like SVR4.

It's also more like AIX.  The point in doing that is to allow dynamic
cloning of the devices so that you eliminate the pty name change and
size limit crap that has persisted on most systems and leads to ever
more complex code in xterm and telnet and other places as machine get
big enough to handle more than 16 PTY's, then more than 32, then....


					Terry Lambert
					terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.