lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)
Chris Wedgwood wrote:
>
> > 1. Companies, clients, and I like the current naming conventions,
> > and want to keep using the current naming conventions.
>
> The current nomencature sucks.
>
> I don't know why everyone wants to hold on to /dev/sda,b,c,d, etc.
> its horrible and IMO probably makes more sense to tie the device to
> the physical controler, bus, card, etc.

Perhaps because of many years of dealing with Solaris
(see David Luyer's posting concerning Solaris) and HP-UX?
Going from /dev/sda1 to /dev/c0t3d0s4 (as an example) is
precisely what companies are trying to get away from.

I just setup a Solaris box for a client less than a month ago.
Solaris /dev is out right ugly. HP-UX /dev is also ugly.
Nearly every HP workstation I have seen at a client site
has dozens of symlinks from complex names to simple names.
The HP-UX /dev directory looks "cluttered".

>
> For mounts, etc. moving when SCSI devices are added, changed, etc.
> then update mount(8) to be smart with volume labels. I had a rough
> version of this working at one point (only worked for ext2fs and swap
> files which had been `tagged').

Yes, this is a pain, but at this point I have come to work around it
whenever a drive is removed.

>
> > 2. What advantage does dev_fs offer us over the present system?
> > Understand that we do not care about thousands & thousands of
> > inodes in /dev, we do not care about directory searches being
> > slow. So given that what are the advantages?
>
> Thousands - think millions or perhaps even more. Think tens of
> controllers, tens of busses, hundreds of devices tens of LUNs and
> tens of partitions.

I was thinking more along the lines of an Intel box with three BusLogic
BT-932's
connected to SCSI expansion boxes, with each box holding 14 drives for a
total
of 42 SCSI disks.

>
> And - yes, many many inodes are a problem.

I agree many inodes are a problem.
It is that problem that we do not care about.
There are various reasons for that attitude, which I will not go into.

>
> Not that I advocate devfs, but there is no denying it does sidestep
> the issue quite nicely, but then again, there may be other
> alternatives not so closely tied to the kernel.

Alternatives are nice to have and alternatives need to be looked at.

>
> -cw

--
Terry L. Ridder
Blue Danube Software (Blaue Donau Software)
"We do not write software, we compose it."

When the toast is burnt
and all the milk has turned
and Captain Crunch is waving farewell
when the Big One finds you
may this song remind you that they
don't serve breakfast in hell
==Breakfast==Newsboys

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:43    [W:0.162 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site