From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Jul 28 13:18:48 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id NAA01212
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 13:18:48 -0700
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA01204
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 13:18:43 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA08626; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 13:16:31 -0700
To: Robert Withrow <witr@rwwa.com>
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 28 Jul 1995 08:23:25 EDT."
             <199507281223.IAA06946@spooky.rwwa.com> 
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 13:16:30 -0700
Message-ID: <8624.806962590@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> > Oh great.  One of UNIX's worst abortions, taken to extremes (can you
> > say "ioctl() is a bogus ``API'' for controlling behavior?"  I thought
> > so)..
> 
> You are mistaken.  Everthing is *not* an ioctl.  It instead resembles
> something like the proc filesystem.  Do you think *that* is an
> abortion?

You misunderstood me.  I was raising the issue of ioctl() as one
argument (there are more) about how mapping all your devices and files
through a filesystem model was WRONG.  And yes, I think the /proc
filesystem is an abortion too.

					Jordan