Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!hp9000.csc.cuhk.hk!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!caen!uunet!wupost!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!newsserver.technet.sg!ntuix!ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg!othman From: othman@ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg (othman (EEE/Div 4)) Subject: Re: Shared libs & development in general. Message-ID: <1992Dec3.031350.23581@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> Sender: news@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (USENET News System) Nntp-Posting-Host: ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6] References: <1992Dec1.081943.6184@tfs.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1992 03:13:50 GMT Lines: 29 Julian Elischer (julian@tfs.com) wrote: : : p.s. I hope that all the people who have written pc-cons drivers : will realise that nothing is done correctly the first time.. : they need to go back.. DISCUSS IT BETWEEN THEMSELVES, (why do Of course but they are useable even with the incompleteness. The best option is LET THE USER decide. Unfortunately Unix is not as configurable as DOS. You do not have alternative ansi.sys e.g. That is why the battle for the pc-cons is so intense. Personally I like the latest post because it implements virtual consoles. Having used screen and xterm, virtual consoles are so much faster . Anyone working hard on configurable unix? There does not seem any group working on that. I've been working on this since I learn Unix but I'm not a good programmer. The Joerg's shared lib looks good because it is configurable. It does not touch the kernel. Just like nfs which is just a daemon. Why can't we use daemons for pc-cons? What is the performace penalty? Why don't we implement a subset in the kernel, the rest as daemons? Then we may have the best of both worlds. I do not like the dosfs, so should be made optional, because mtools is sufficient for ME. -- Othman bin Ahmad, School of EEE, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 2263. Internet Email: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg