Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 17:23:29 -0400 From: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM> To: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru> Cc: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@plutotech.com>, "Sergei S. Laskavy" <laskavy@cs.msu.su>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: /bin/chio: why in /bin ? Message-ID: <199707262123.RAA18551@whizzo.TransSys.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 27 Jul 1997 00:29:58 %2B0400." <Pine.BSF.3.96.970727002703.1364C-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970727002703.1364C-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Sat, 26 Jul 1997, Louis A. Mamakos wrote: > > > chio is not clearly machine dependent. It talks to any SCSI media > > changer device, just like mt works with any SCSI tape device. > > Your words are in conflict: you talk about "not machine dependent" > and "SCSI device". Any phisical device which not exist for all machines > (like memory f.e.) IS machine dependance. SCSI not exist for all machines. So what other types of tape drives are likely to be installed on a FreeBSD system? Or media changes? Ones hung off the floppy controller? There are machines with no tape drives at all, and machines with no network interfaces. Yet /bin/rcp exists which isn't useful if you don't have a network interface and /bin/domainname which is isn't useful unless you happen to be using NIS. By machine dependent, I take this to mean "PC architecture" or CPU-type dependent, not based on what selection of peripherals happen to be installed on any particular system. I suppose you could make the system architecturally "pure" this way, yet the result isn't likely to be either useful or practical. louie
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199707262123.RAA18551>