From owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org Thu Jan  1 21:01:52 2004
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6p2+3.4W/8.11.3) id i01C1qS05473;
	Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:01:52 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (postfix@elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6p2+3.4W/8.11.3) with ESMTP/inet id i01C1qC05468
	for <acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:01:52 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from msmith@freebsd.org)
Received: from [192.168.0.100] (c-24-7-66-113.client.comcast.net [24.7.66.113])
	by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 558DA5C7A5
	for <acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org>; Thu,  1 Jan 2004 04:01:50 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v609)
In-Reply-To: <20040101001641.GG784@hermes.home.paeps.cx>
References: <20031212114100.GC659@hermes.nixsys.be> <20031212171121.M54374@root.org> <20031215073539.GB685@hermes.nixsys.be> <20031231113238.A2478@root.org> <20031231195702.GF751@hermes.home.paeps.cx> <9FDA83CC-3BDF-11D8-AE15-000393C72BD6@mac.com> <20031231145342.P2857@root.org> <4B0D15D1-3BEB-11D8-AE15-000393C72BD6@mac.com> <20040101001641.GG784@hermes.home.paeps.cx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <4669686A-3C52-11D8-AE15-000393C72BD6@freebsd.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org>
To: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.609)
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Precedence: list
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 04:01:47 -0800
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 2963
Subject: [acpi-jp 2963] Re: [patch] Thermal ioctls?
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
X-Originator: msmith@freebsd.org
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+031216


On Dec 31, 2003, at 4:16 PM, Philip Paeps wrote:

>> ... I won't bother to detail the kernel-side differences, but suffice 
>> it to
>> say that adding a sysctl node is a lot easier than adding an entire 
>> new
>> device to back the ioctls.
>
> Yes, but there's already a device, we're merely adding ioctls to it in
> addition to the ones that are already there...

My point stands; there shouldn't be a device in the first place.

  = Mike

