Subject: Re: 32 bit dev_t
To: Todd Vierling <tv@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Lucio de Re <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/16/1998 06:27:23
According to Todd Vierling <tv@NetBSD.ORG> :
> I have not yet changed mknod(8) or ls(1) (except to try out a three part
> split on ls). I'm just trying to address the cosmetic issues, which at the
> base, aren't even problems. Restructuring dev_t as you proposed just adds
> marginal readability at the cost of kernel cruft and additional
> compatibility issues.
I think it's time the emphasis here got changed a touch (mudslinging
being evidently ready to pop up): which of the two proposals - Todd's
extension vs minor split - scales better to 64-bits?
I think we should expand to 64-bits now, but that may be a little
premature given the most common architecture. As a compromise, the
mechanism that makes it easiest to upgrade to 64-bits should be
Lucio de Re (email@example.com)
Disclaimer: I'm working at getting my opinions to agree with me.