Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Jan 1998 20:37:35 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: devfs |
| |
Leonard N. Zubkoff writes: > Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 15:41:57 +1100 > From: Richard Gooch <rgooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU> > > It does seem inconsistent to have letters delimiting all the other > parameters except the slices. If you can come up with a different > letter for "slice" which doesn't sound too contrived, I'd prefer > that. Right now 's' could be either "subdevice" or "slice". One could > use 'l' for discLabel, but that looks too much like '1'. > > While I perfer the more abstract device/subdevice concept to the > more specific device/partition/slice proposal, device/subdevice is > not really general enough to handle slices within partitions without > using a contrived subdevice encoding. I don't have a reasonable > suggestion to offer for extending it ("k" for contrived, anyone? > :-)), so it looks like using device/partition/slice is the best > we're going to do.
OK. Hopefully this covers everything. So, we have: /dev/sd/c0b1t2d3p4 for a whole partition, be it primary or logical /dev/sd/c0b1t2d3p4s5 for a single slice in a partition
Leonard: one last choice before I set this in stone: do we use 'd' for LUN or 'u'? Since we have to drop the device/subdevice concept, I suppose we could reconsider the d/u choice too. IMHO 'u' is a little more obvious, although I'll leave it at 'd' if you really think that's better.
Regards,
Richard....
| |