Re: LANANA: To Pending Device Number Registrants

[Kai Henningsen]

[e-mail] (Richard Gooch)  wrote on 16.05.01 in <[e-mail]>:

> H. Peter Anvin writes:
> > Richard Gooch wrote:
> > >
> > > H. Peter Anvin writes:
> > > > Richard Gooch wrote:
> > > > > Argh! What I wrote in text is what I meant to say. The code didn't
> > > > > match. No wonder people seemed to be missing the point. So the line
> > > > > of code I actually meant was:
> > > > >         if (strcmp (buffer + len - 3, "/cd") != 0) {
> > > >
> > > > This is still a really bad idea.  You don't want to tie this kind of
> > > > things to the name.
> > >
> > > Why do you think it's a bad idea?
> >
> > Because you are now, once again, tying two things that are
> > completely and utterly unrelated: device classification and device
> > name.  It breaks every time someone comes out with a new device
> > which is "kind of like an old device, but not really," like
> > CD-writers (which was kind-of-like WORM, kind-of-like CD-ROM) and
> > DVD (kind-of-like CD)...
>
> But all devices which export a CD-ROM interface will do so. So the
> device node that is associated with the CD-ROM driver will export
> CD-ROM semantics, and the trailing name will be "/cd".

Uh, how do they have the filename end in more than one device type suffix  
at the same time?

That was the point, remember. You're trying to find out about a device on  
the end of your file handle, and that device *does* match more than one of  
these.

MfG Kai