Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 25 Jan 1998 00:05:07 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
To:        jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard)
Cc:        taob@nbc.netcom.ca, leec@adam.adonai.net, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Had the shotgun out and pointed at my -current/SMP box...
Message-ID:  <199801250005.RAA12408@usr04.primenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <12440.885627653@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Jan 23, 98 11:40:53 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > that could comfortably handle ~100 users.  With today's CPU's and the
> > price of memory, it's too bad we can only get 256 pty's per machine.
> > I'll bet a nice Pentium II system could handle 500 shell users.
> 
> Yeah, if only someone (sigh) would take up that cloning PTY driver
> project, such arbitrary limits would be unnecessary.  [he gazes
> wistfully off into the distance :-)]

I have a cloning pty driver and cloning bfs and tun and vnode
drivers as well.

It requires some semantic changes to the devfs that PHK and Julian
have opposed, so far.  Specifically, I have to be able to open a
directory and treat it as a device, and then I need clone ioctl()'s
(this is a better approach than using an alternate vp passback, as
someone suggested).

It also requires switching over to devfs, which you have opposed,
so, far.

So, when we switching -current to solely devfs?  8-).


					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?199801250005.RAA12408>