On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Bernd Ernesti wrote:

> On Thu Jan  9 02:32:00 1997, Christoph Badura wrote:
> > 
> > netbsd@arresum.INka.DE (Bernd Ernesti) writes:
> > >>     Same for MAKEDEV. So wouldn't it
> > >>     be usefull to reserve some numbers for attapi, or will it be never
> > >>     included to the official tree some day?
> > 
> > >The atapi source are unoffical changes so we can't really care about the
> > >device number for every unoffical driver.
> > 
> > What a load of nonsense.  You either have to start a registry for
> 
> Where the hell should I know about other device numbers if I DON"T
> USE IT and the driver is NOT in our -current tree and nobody mentioned
> the device numbers on current-users?
> 
	Assuming it is intended to have an ATAPI driver in the tree at	
	some point (I would have thought this a virtual certainty), and
	given that ATAPI would be very widely used, it would seem sensible
	to allocate some numbers for the device nodes now, to help users
	on the i386 & arm32 ports.

		David/abs	david@{mono.org,southern.com,mhm-internet.com}

System Manager: Southern Studios Ltd, PO Box 59, London N22 1AR.
Satisfied User: NetBSD, free Un*x {i386,sparc,mac68k,+more} 'www.netbsd.org'.
  System Admin: MHM Internet, 14 Barley Mow Passage, Chiswick, London W4 4PH.
         SysOP: Monochrome, Largest UK Internet BBS - 'telnet mono.org'.