Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: devfs | Date | Tue, 13 Jan 1998 14:33:25 +0000 | From | Tethys <> |
| |
>> directory tree is a good compromise. It will be easier to find devices if >> there is a shallow hierarchy based on function: disk, tape, cdrom, scsi (for >> generic), etc. > >Yes, that's my feeling too. I think devices should be categorised by >functionality. Whether something is a SCSI disc, an IDE disc or a >floppy is of secondary importance.
So how do you classify something like the PD drives found on recent Compaqs and other machines? They're a combined drive that accepts both CD-ROMs and rewritable optical disks. Under NT, they have two separate drive letters. Are you suggesting that we have two devices for the same drive, one in /dev/cdrom, one in /dev/scsi (or whatever)? I don't even know if the drive is supported at all under Linux, but the principle is there.
>Instead of /dev/disk how about /dev/dsk, which is in keeping with >Solaris and HP-UX?
We've already sacrificed Solaris compatibility by changing the identifier letters. If anything, using /dev/dsk could confuse Solaris admins moving to Linux, expecting to find Solarice device names there. Using /dev/disk would be definitely different, and immediately gives a clue that it's not like Solaris. Minor point, though, and I'd accept either.
Tet
-- ``Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils'' - General George Stark --------------------+--------------+---------------------------------------- tethys@ml.com | Micro$oft: | Linux, the choice of a GNU generation. tet@astradyne.co.uk | Just say no! | See http://www.uk.linux.org for details
| |