Bigger process IDs and "dev_t"s (was: Re: RISC v. CISC...)

[Jim Reid]

In article <1988Oct31.183021.13880 at utzoo.uucp> henry at utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
> ... on the merits/demerits of bigger dev_t's ......
>Clearly making dev_t 32 bits would make life easier.........

This has already happened on some machines. Sequent have done this on
Release 3 of their UNIX and I think Encore have done so too. They've had
to do this because it's not unknown for their boxes to be configured for
over 256 tty and/or ptys.

		Jim
-- 
ARPA:	jim%cs.strath.ac.uk at ucl-cs.arpa, jim at cs.strath.ac.uk
UUCP:	jim at strath-cs.uucp, ...!uunet!mcvax!ukc!strath-cs!jim
JANET:	jim at uk.ac.strath.cs

"JANET domain ordering is swapped around so's there'd be some use for rev(1)!"