From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <cfd7e63c8feda555fca7c70f979fbe71@quanstro.net>
Date: Wed,  1 Feb 2006 19:13:54 +0000
From: quanstro@quanstro.net
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Van Jacobsen's network stack restructure
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: ee8b9328-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Wed Feb  1 18:49:24 CST 2006, leimy2k@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > i don't know anything about the reasoning for this. efficiency?
> > support for a static /dev? i don't know.
> 
> Probably because they don't have a single devfs they can agree on?
> 

that assumes that there was a dynamic /dev when networking was
added.

nobody was even thinking about dynamic devices when networking
was added to linux

- erik