lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)
Date
>> naming sceme, change only what needs to be changed like SCSI.
>
>By that argument you should never introduce something new because
>people will be "forced" to use the new thing.


No I am not saying that. But it doesn't make sense to change everything,
even the devices which do not suffer from large amounts of sub devices.
Besides I am agruing against the gratuitous use of the new naming sceme not
dev_fs in general. SCSI may and probably does need it but most other
devices do not. Why change /dev/hd[a-h] when EIDE devices are already
location based?

>
>> >Again, just use the old names: I didn't take tham away.
>> >
>> >> We need to keep the "KISS" principle in mind. While the naming scheme
>> >> of dev_fs may be logical it is not simple.
>> >>
>> >> /dev/sda, /dev/sda[1-15] is simple.
>> >
>> >And you can keep using it.
>>
>> Probably not for long if devfs is added.
>
>This could only happen if there was widespread support in the Linux
>community. It would also require a push. I have no plans for such a
>push. Also, support for the plain major&minor disc-based device nodes
>will remain (for POSIX compatibility), so you can create device nodes
>with whatever name you like.
>You can even set CONFIG_DEVFS_FS to 'n'.
>
>> >> Richard, I have read your FAQ where the naming scheme for SCSI disks
>> >> is described and it screams "ugly".
>> >
>> >So ignore the new names and keep using the old names. Nothing in your
>> >message talks about devfs itself, you're only addressing the minor
>> >issue of naming, which is in fact not a problem.
>>
>> I think the verbosely cryptic naming sceme of the current devfs is the
only
>> real problem with it. My suggestion is to simplify the naming (keeping
>> backward compatability when possible).
>
>There *is* a need for a naming scheme like the new SCSI names, at
>least for big systems. People with small systems or who don't like the
>new names can use the existing names. But that should stop people with
>big systems being allowed to have a location-based naming scheme.
>

I am not against the name change where it is needed, like SCSI, but EIDE
devices definately do not need it, nor do other devices.

> Regards,
>
> Richard....
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
>



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:43    [W:0.033 / U:0.840 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site