[openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 14:25:08 +0200 CEST
"François Revol" <revol@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> AFAIK (though I never had an Amiga (shame on me)), the "devices",
> called as foobar:, were managed by a different process for each of
> them.
> so doing an ASSIGN VM: would actually spawn a new process to manage
> that (but maybe that was only for real devices ?) particular device.
No, that was only done for handlers.
Adios...
Axel.
- References:
- [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- From: François Revol
Other related posts:
- » [openbeos] OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- » [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten
- From: François Revol