From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Nov 14 06:34:18 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA02504
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 06:34:18 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA02495
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 06:34:13 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from toor@dyson.iquest.net)
Received: (from root@localhost)
	by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) id JAA01323
	for hackers@freebsd.org; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 09:34:05 -0500 (EST)
From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net>
Message-Id: <199711141434.JAA01323@dyson.iquest.net>
Subject: Need some input re: named pipes
To: hackers@freebsd.org
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 09:33:59 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


Could anyone give me some feedback on an idea of making our pipe code (fast)
used for named pipes?  I don't think that it is hard to implement, but
do people usually use the socket ioctl's for named pipes?  Many of those
would go-away when moving to the pipe code.

-- 
John
dyson@freebsd.org
jdyson@nc.com