Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!eagle!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!sri-unix!phil@rice From: phil%rice@sri-unix.UUCP Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: Terminal paging in the kernel Message-ID: <17333@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date: Thu, 8-Mar-84 16:58:08 EST Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.17333 Posted: Thu Mar 8 16:58:08 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 11-Mar-84 00:36:33 EST Lines: 29 From: William LeFebvreYea, and *we* make assumptions about what disk drives are. In a piece of common code. That it's 24 sectors around and maybe 80 tracks deep. Is there not a trend toward larger disks, or controllers with built-in addressing smarts? We change the kernel code again and again... Given a typical system, there are a wider variety of terminals than disk drives. Mainly because there are about 20 times more terminals on the system than disk drives. Also, given a typical system, terminal types tend to change more often than disk drive types. Mainly because there is an order of magnitude complexity difference between changing a terminal and changing a disk drive. Not to mention the fact that people who dial up a computer use whatever terminal they have at home. When was the last time you changed the type of drive you are using? When was the last time you added or swapped out a terminal? When was the last time someone connected a disk drive to your system over a phone? Your argument is fairly vacuous. It's quite true that the disk drive characteristics are hard coded in the kernel. But they don't change very often. You can afford to hard code disk drive characteristics. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but you can get away with it. You CAN'T afford to do that with terminals! And anyone that does so is painting himself into a corner. William LeFebvre Department of Mathematical Sciences Rice University