From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mveety@gmail.com To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 15:40:49 -0500 Message-ID: <3692130.4DpTLt9QCJ@as-laptop> User-Agent: KMail/4.9.5 (Linux/3.7.1-3-ck; KDE/4.9.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [9fans] these are release of 9front? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 043fa90a-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 19:38:03 Richard Miller wrote: > > At the time, the idea was just to have a single binary (usbd) carrying the > > usb stuff. Because using multiple ones implied that the kernel (usbd was > > at /boot) had multiple copies of the same libraries for each different > > binary. > When we worry about multiple copies of the same library code, sometimes the > answer is to abstract the library functionality into another fileserver. > Is there a way we could invent another usb driver layer to do that? I don't see how making another usb stack would be a good idea. We already have enough. -- Veety