[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:0.051 / U:11.012 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site