On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Andrew Brown wrote:

> although as i understand it, the major obstacle is that the minor
> numbers are crammed together with no space for more partitions, yes?
> that's why i suggested the new major number.
> 
>    % ls -l wd[01]?
>    brw-r-----  1 root  operator  0,  0 Mar  6  1999 wd0a
>    ...
>    brw-r-----  1 root  operator  0,  7 Mar  6  1999 wd0h
>    brw-r-----  1 root  operator  0,  8 Mar  6  1999 wd1a
>    ...
> 
> there's no room for a wd0i, even if someone decided to make one.

Right. The thing is that the old major and minor numbers really need to
keep working. i.e. Even when we go to more than 8 partitions per disk (the
hashed-out idea is 64 as it leaves lots of units yet also gives many
partitions), wd0a will probably always be block device 0,0. 

Thus we'll need two major devices, each with a different unit/partition
divisioon scheme.

That's why it can't be done in a few days (or even a few weeks :-)

Take care,

Bill