From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Oct 12 22:24:54 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id WAA15079
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 12 Oct 1995 22:24:54 -0700
Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.17])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA15074
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 12 Oct 1995 22:24:52 -0700
Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin [198.145.90.50]) by Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA24411; Thu, 12 Oct 1995 22:24:42 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id WAA00559; Thu, 12 Oct 1995 22:24:36 -0700
Message-Id: <199510130524.WAA00559@corbin.Root.COM>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@ref.tfs.com>
cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard), terry@lambert.org,
        jhay@mikom.csir.co.za, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: IPX now available 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 12 Oct 95 21:56:04 PDT."
             <199510130456.VAA06646@ref.tfs.com> 
From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM>
Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 22:24:34 -0700
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

>> 
>> > The gist of this is that he wants to work on putting simple linker code
>> > into the kernel, and I very much agree with him.
>> 
>> Assuming that you and the anti-bloatists can work this out, this and
>> everything following it certainly sounds reasonable to me.
>> 
>> 	dev_add_char			(just dev_add?)
>> 	dev_remove_char			(just dev_remove?)
>devfs already has dev_add() and dev_link()
>these are called by the driver to make a new device in devfs 
>or to make a new 'link' to an existing device in devfs.
>dev_remove is there too but not really implimented..
>maybe I should change the names to devfs_add et al.

   I must be missing something - why are these mutually exclusive?

-DG