Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Jan 1998 23:05:58 -0800 (PST) | From | Jauder Ho <> | Subject | Re: disk naming proposal & devfs (fwd) |
| |
leonard's naming scheme sounds reasonable.. I would have preferred the names to be a little closer to what solaris defines and just throw in the lun as l but that's okay.
--jauder
On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, Richard Gooch wrote:
> Perry Harrington writes: > > Greetings, I am new to (this) list. I have quite a bit of experience with > > Solaris, and I must say that duplicating the Solaris naming scheme to access > > SCSI disks/devices is a Good Thing(tm). Getting commercial software vendors > > to support Linux is difficult already, creating some non-standard obscure > > naming scheme is a step in the wrong direction. It is conceivable that we > > could get some commercial vendor (Veritas???) to support Linux when logical > > vols are up to snuff, and this would make them happy. I personally think > > that the Controller,Target,device?,slice model seems kindof silly, but Solaris > > There is no way we can use the Solaris format, since they miss > information (the SCSI channel or bus, which is a per host/controller > thing). Leonard has come up with a reasonable alternative to what I've > done: h0c0t0u0p2: host,channel,target,unit,partition. > > Regards, > > Richard.... >
Tag. You're IT.
| |