dev_t / udev_t confusion ?

[Robert Watson]

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> Personally I don't think there is much need for a long discussion and I
> would prefer to see simply a show of hands for yes and no, and any hear
> any really heavy duty arguments pro et contra. 

Sounds good to me -- I ran into this recently with the audit
implementation because Solaris embeds a "udev_t" in the BSM audit format.
Since the format is handled by the kernel as well as user space, I had to
do the usual gymnastics to work around the udev_t confusion.  I'd love to
see that resolved, thanks!

Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert at fledge.watson.org      Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research