From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 15 13:08:52 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA07767 for current-outgoing; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 13:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA07746 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 13:08:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id MAA23082; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 12:46:38 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199704151946.MAA23082@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: ISODEVMAP in cd9660 ? To: phk@dk.tfs.com Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 12:46:37 -0700 (MST) Cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, current@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <536.861102080@critter> from "phk@dk.tfs.com" at Apr 15, 97 01:01:20 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >> Anybody know a good reason for not nuking the "ISODEVMAP" stuff in cd9660 ? > > > >Does anybody realize what's the intention behind all this? To allow bootable CDROM's. > No idea really, and since DEVFS will make it pointless and it wasn't > documented I've nuked it. DEVFS *will* make it pointless. However... non-documentation is not a good reason for nuking something; there's a *lot* of kernel code that falls into that basket, inclusing almost all of the VM and generic (non-FS) kernel code. I except some of the FS code because the VFS frameworkis intended to be documented by the Heidemann thesis (even if it's not a good fit because of the way it was integrated). Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.