Subject: Re: Why /dev/bpf rather than /dev/bpf0?
To: Christos Zoulas <christos@zoulas.com>
From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@shagadelic.org>
List: tech-kern
Date: 12/08/2004 17:11:22
--Apple-Mail-6--306569236
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed


On Dec 8, 2004, at 12:59 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:

> Autoconf test? The /dev/bpf -> /dev/bpf0 is the least of your concerns 
> if
> you are writing code that it is supposed to run on other OS's. AIX for
> example uses /dev/bpf.

Besides, we can easily make a bpf0 -> bpf symlink for compatibility.

(Not that I think we should, but we can.)

         -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@shagadelic.org>


--Apple-Mail-6--306569236
content-type: application/pgp-signature; x-mac-type=70674453;
	name=PGP.sig
content-description: This is a digitally signed message part
content-disposition: inline; filename=PGP.sig
content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFBt6Y6OpVKkaBm8XkRAuMrAJwOQiJ+tGzCAHj1Cp2LO8JaWpS0FgCfT2gg
9SVuRRFlE/i7Ql6naDOV5sM=
=joZd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail-6--306569236--