Robert Fekete <frobert@balabit.com> writes:
The intent has always been to use pipe() for named pipes, and file() for everything else.
I'm now thinking about introducing a device() destination/source which would be equivalent to file(), but follow_freq() would not be allowed.
What do you think?
Sorry if I'm missing something, but do we really need a separate driver that is almost entirely the same as another one?
It's not a separate driver, it'd be syntactic sugar only. Meaning, that device("/dev/klog") would be exactly the same as file("/dev/klog" follow_freq(0)), just easier to write, and device() can have additional restrictions like not allowing follow_freq(). (At least, that's how I understood it - a completely separate thing wouldn't make much sense, indeed) -- |8]