Re: DevFS holy war
> Clearer. But I can't really agree that /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part3
> (your example) is better than /dev/hda3. For one thing, IDE doesn't even
> have luns.
Who cares that ide (currently?) doesn't have luns?
scsi has, and i like doing s/scsi/ide/ without having to remember
cryptic things like hda
or look at the cd drives.
Novice users will probably NOT know which device they attached their
cdrom onto. Having /dev/cdroms/cdrom0 /dev/cdroms/cdrom1 etc. is EASY.
Btw: you don't have to use /dev/ide, you can just use /dev/discs i
think. You don't have to care about ide vs. scsi then.
Maybe this is a devfsd feature though.
Devfsd does also provide compatibility for those preferring the old
names; i for myself don't need them any more.
/dev/discs/disc0/part1 isn't too hard to enter...
BTW: I do prefer using LABEL=foobar in my fstab, too...
Easier if you add new discs and move the old ones around.
So for the COMMON user (who isn't entering the device name of their disc
all the time in a shell without tab completition) devfs definitely IS an
improvement.
And especially with hotplugging there are lot's of benefits, like
/dev/input/mice etc. being automatically generated when i plug in the
usb mouse into my notebook, /dev/floppies/fd0 appearing when i plug in
the floppy drive etc.
But it looks like this gets into a holy war like vi vs. emacs.
And i don't like people flaming around "you just want to use devfs
because you think it's c00l." - that's a bad way of talking.
Greetings,
Erich
P.S. I've seen the Topic "Towards a new way looking onto devices" in
LWN, i think - maybe someone should check for recent developments in the
linux kernel?
Reply to: