home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!matt.ksu.ksu.edu!news
- From: probreak@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (James Michael Chacon)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
- Subject: Re: Is the SLS on tsx-11 *ready* yet?
- Date: 21 Jan 1993 00:41:46 -0600
- Organization: Kansas State University
- Lines: 29
- Message-ID: <1jlgjaINNeme@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>
- References: <1jkaccINN8a0@uwm.edu> <JOHNSONM.93Jan20154546@lars.stolaf.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu
-
- johnsonm@stolaf.edu (Michael K. Johnson) writes:
-
-
- >In article <1jkaccINN8a0@uwm.edu> rick@ee.uwm.edu (Rick Miller) writes:
-
- > ...and what about Peter's ttyS? cludge? Personally, I don't like it.
-
- > But what do I know, I'm just the Linux Device Registrar.
-
- >Don't get huffy. There is nothing morally imperitive about ttysn,
- >either. They used to be called tty64, tty65, tty66, etc, and then
- >they were switched to make it more reasonable. However, it was not
- >noticed at the time that that got in the way of high pty's. Peter has
- >taken a brave step in eliminating namespace contention. Don't call it
- >a kludge if you are the "Registrar" and haven't come up with anything
- >better yourself. You are only entitled to call it a kludge if you
- >have proposed something better, IMHO, and I haven't seen any better
- >proposals, from you or anyone else.
-
- >michaelkjohnson
-
- I just wanted to add that I like it myself when I heard about it. I
- remember the tty64, etc.. and didn't like those. Naming them ttys? really
- confuses somethings that assume those are ptys. When I heard it had been
- done on the SLS dist. I decided to make them here. Gives me 64 pty's now
- instead of only 48 which is a big plus.
-
- James
-
-