From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Nov 14 18:18:47 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA22558 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 18:18:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA22553 for ; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 18:18:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from toor@dyson.iquest.net) Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) id VAA01287; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 21:18:31 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" Message-Id: <199711150218.VAA01287@dyson.iquest.net> Subject: Re: Need some input re: named pipes In-Reply-To: <199711142357.QAA18184@usr06.primenet.com> from Terry Lambert at "Nov 14, 97 11:57:07 pm" To: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 21:18:31 -0500 (EST) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Reply-To: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Terry Lambert said: > > Could anyone give me some feedback on an idea of making our pipe code (fast) > > used for named pipes? I don't think that it is hard to implement, but > > do people usually use the socket ioctl's for named pipes? Many of those > > would go-away when moving to the pipe code. > > > Wouldn't this break X? > > Yes, I know I'm the one who's always trying to kill struct fileops... > Well, that is one of the reasons that I wanted to look at doing the change. Of course, one of the major goals would be X compatibility. If it means that some ioctls or somesuch had to be implemented, so be it... -- John dyson@freebsd.org jdyson@nc.com