Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???) | Date | Thu, 06 Aug 1998 08:44:27 -0700 | From | Jurgen Botz <> |
| |
"Anthony Barbachan" wrote: > /dev/sd{a,b,c,...} is definately cleaner and simplier than > /dev/dsk/c0t0u0d0s0 (or whatever?!?!?!?). And EIDE devices definately do
As a system administrator with over a decade experience, I must say that I disagree completely. The old naming scheme is problematic and ugly and the DEVFS one is practical and elegant. MHO.
(I rather suspect that Anthony and some other detractors have never administered systems with multiple SCSI busses and more than a few drives.)
Personally I really like DEVFS. It solves some real problems and it does it in a scaleable, forward-looking manner. Auto-generation seems like a quick-and-dirty hack by comparison. The counter-arguments I've seen seemed to mostly refer to vague aesthetic issues. I think the aesthetics of this kind of thing flow from its functionality, and by that DEVFS is beautiful.
-- ~~/ /~) /.. /-< \_/ u r g e n /_ _) o t z
- 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
| |