> There's still plently of people using libc 5 (and for good
> reasons!). I think there's even people using libc 4. If 2.3 were to
> introduce a 64 bit dev_t, it would stuff these people up, I think.
> While you could perhaps argue that libc 4 is so ancient that it
> doesn't have to be supported with kernel 2.3, I don't think libc 5
> compatibility should be broken yet.
But even if you change dev_t to only 32bits you will break libc5
compatibility. You either stick with 16bits or make the new
functionality only available when using glibc. Please note I haven't
said drop support for libc5. Backward-compatibility can be achieved
to avoid using for a new device number a device where all bits beside
the first 16 are set. I.e., if you use
0000 0000 0000 XXXX -> old device
YYYY YYYY ZZZZ XXXX -> with YYYY YYYY ZZZZ != 0000 0000 0000
and YYYY YYYY = major
ZZZZ XXXX = minor
you can use libc5 with the old numbering.
-- Uli
---------------. drepper at gnu.org ,-. 1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper \ ,-------------------' \ Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Cygnus Solutions `--' drepper at cygnus.com `------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu