[lkml]   [1998]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: no need for a devfs (MOLNAR Ingo)  wrote on 11.01.98 in <>:

    > On 10 Jan 1998, Kai Henningsen wrote:
    > > (Phil Brutsche) wrote on 07.01.98 in
    > > <>:
    > >
    > > > No, please don't do this. It's too confusing. What's wrong with the
    > > > current SCSI setup (/dev/sda, /dev/sda1, /dev/sda2, etc) in any case?
    > >
    > > It's fragile. But then, so is the proposed replacement.
    > ? whats the problem with devfs-v3? It removes the dependence on _any_
    > numbering scheme. You pick a logical naming (in string-space) _once_, and
    > it will be supported forever. The mapping between devices and internal
    > numbering (major/minor) is transparent.

    That's true for all these schemes.

    The important question is, what does the name _mean_? With the current
    scheme, "/dev/sdb7" means "the 3rd logical partition on the 2nd SCSI
    disk". "/dev/hdb7" is a little better - "the 3rd logical partition on the
    primary IDE slave disk".

    What I proposed was something meaning effectively "the filesystem I mkfs'd
    on 1997-12-17 13:55:21.765".

    See the difference?

    MfG Kai

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:41    [W:0.041 / U:2.428 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site