From owner-freebsd-current Wed Jun 24 11:57:00 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA05391 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:57:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [195.8.133.1] (may be forged)) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA05220 for ; Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:56:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA01293; Wed, 24 Jun 1998 20:52:54 +0200 (CEST) To: joelh@gnu.org cc: peter@netplex.com.au, chuckr@glue.umd.edu, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Heads up: block devices to disappear! In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:45:38 CDT." <199806241845.NAA03422@detlev.UUCP> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 20:51:32 +0200 Message-ID: <1260.898714292@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <199806241845.NAA03422@detlev.UUCP>, Joel Ray Holveck writes: > >> Peter pretty much got it right on the nail. The distinction between >> block and character device will in the future be made solely based on >> which access method is employed. >> More details as things progress. > >So could we, in theory (devfs aside for the moment), put up block >devices as renamed character devices, and retain the interface? That is basically what was meant by "adequate compatibilty code" :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." "ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message