[lkml]   [1996]   [Jun]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Ideas for v2.1
> > As a SCSI user, I put my vote in for using a naming convention
> > like: c0t0l0 (controller, target (device), LUN)
> > but what about the _FUTURE_?? Ultra SCSI devices can be dynamically
> > reconfigured by software to a different target number. Or will Linux
> > decide now to _NEVER_ use such a feature?
> Or what about a person with two removeable media SCSI drives. It
> would be nice it the mountpoint could be specific to the actual
> removeable disk so it doesn't matter which removeable drive the disk
> is mounted in.

Although I like your idea, I wonder if it is possible to incorporate
this into existing filesystems? For it to be practical, I think
_all_ fs types should be supported.

Andrew E. Mileski My home page
Linux Plug-and-Play Project Leader. See URL

Red Hat Software sponsors these pages - I have no other affilitation
with Red Hat Software, and I have never used any of their products.

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.081 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site