Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: devfs | Date | Fri, 7 Aug 1998 14:24:11 -0400 (EDT) | From | Jeff Garzik <> |
| |
Alan Cox wrote: > > > * You know exactly what devices you have. Under Solaris, a "boot -r" > > neatly creates the SCSI devices present, named precisely for their > > controller/SCSI/LUN id. Management couldn't be easier. > > That doesn't need kernel help
If a user-level program will make sure my /dev entries are accurate on boot-up, great! Is that possible?
> > Putting devices in "scan order" never made sense to me. Why should > > the first SCSI drive scanned be /dev/sda? What happens when I switch > > the cables and drives around. Same filesystems, but the devices have > > all changed. > > And this doesnt need kernel help either. In fact using device scan order is > often more convenient than device position. When it comes to volume management > of a big system both of these (and Solaris) are equally dumb approaches.
Convenient for whom? Kernel programmers or admins/users?
What would you suggest as a smart approach to volume management?
> It all comes down to > > mount `wherehasitgone --uuid=blah` /mnt/mydisk > > And wherehasitgone is a tool to walk the disk tree and find a volume by uuid > and/or maybe ask LDAP/NIS maps to find it via NFS
What would this look like in /etc/fstab?
Thanks,
Jeff
P.S. I'm not arguing for devfs per se; simply arguing for a "canonical, never-out-of-date /dev" and "devices named by SCSI id".
-- Jeff Garzik Typhoon, Cyclone, Diablo, and INN http://www.spinne.com/usenet/ News tuning and consulting
- 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
| |