On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 07:16:12PM +0200, Jaromir Dolecek wrote:
  | Robert Elz wrote:
  | > So, unless we have some evidence that vendors are about to start issuing
  | > major numbers in the 140-191 block, that NetBSD wants to be compatible with,
  | > I think I'd do
  | > 
  | > 	144-191		Distribution (NetBSD Vendor) and local use majors
  | > 	192...		MI numbers for new NetBSD drivers.
  | 
  | This sounds fine to me. What do others thing? If there
  | would not be any objections to this, I'll update the comments
  | in MD majors.* and src/sys/dev/majors accordingly on Tuesday/Wednesday.

Whilst I know the benefit in providing namespace for "local" devices,
if we're trying to restrict ourselves to 0..255, why not ensure that
NetBSD has more of that namespace.

E.g:
	144-159		local-use (including vendor)
	160-255		NetBSD MI

or even (my preferred):
	144-239		NetBSD MI (allocate from lowest first)
	240-255		Local/vendor (allocate top down)

The latter means that if we find a compelling reason (i.e, local users
or vendors beg for more than 16 "private-use" majors :), we can revise
the namespace in the future without too many problems?