From: ijackson@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ian Jackson) Subject: Re: [NEW]: The Linux Device List Date: Fri, 7 May 1993 02:07:17 GMT
In article <1993May5.102510.12491@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> I proposed:
tty[a-d] for the `standard' 4 ports
tty[e-o][0-f] for multi-port cards (ie tty<card><port>)
I stand by the above, despite Rick Miller's contrary proposal in his
latest release of the Device List.
IMHO the scheme with tty[S..]n is ugly, too small to fit the range of
cards and ports in without crowding and making the namespace hard to
fathom, interferes with part of the most natural extension of the pty
namespace, is unnecessarily complicated for the most common cases, and
uses unnecessary capitals.
The only advantage I can think of is that it is an extension of what
it seems some people have been already using, namely ttyS[0-4] for the
standard ports - though there seems to be some confusion, so this
could be considered a disadvantage.
In article <jvsC6KIqw.4GC@netcom.com> Jonathan Stockley answered my
>> - similar to a major commerical Unix (ScumOS), and thus familiar
>> to most Unix people.
with
>I question the implication that *most* Unix people are using ScumOS. Do you
>have any figures to back this up? Don't forget the non-workstation world.
I didn't say that most Unix people are using ScumOS; I just said that
most would be familiar with this scheme. It is true that I may be
overestimating the breadth of experience of some Unix people, though.
>Hmm, I have never heard of this "accepted convention". I have looked at an
>SVR3 system that uses [pt]ty[p-z][0-f] first then [pt]ty[a-o][0-f] next when
>the first lot have all been used.
Interesting; obviously it is not an accepted convention everywhere - I
stand corrected. However is it really relevant ? Are you proposing
the scheme you describe ? It seems to me that tty[p-zP-Z] is better,
firstly because it brings the pty namespace closer together, and
secondly because it allows us to use tty[a-o] for the serial ports as
I propose, which is better in other respects besides freeing tty[P-Z]
for ptys - see my original posting.
> On the SvR4 systems I looked at they have
>/dev/pts/0, /dev/pts/1 on through /dev/pts/511 [...]
Hopefully you're not suggesting such a scheme for Linux.
-- Ian Jackson <ijackson@nyx.cs.du.edu> (non urgent email only - see below) home: 35 Molewood Close, Cambridge, CB4 3SR, England; phone: +44 223 327029 work & urgent email: <iwj@cam-orl.co.uk> Olivetti Research Ltd; +44 223 343398 PGP2 public key on request; fingerprint = 5906F687 BD03ACAD 0D8E602E FCF37657