Re: DevFS holy war
On Tue, 2001-11-06 at 14:29, Thomas Zimmerman wrote:
> On 06-Nov 04:38, Erich Schubert wrote:
> > > 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...
>
> Yes, not too hard, but it's Dumb. A device namespace (which devFS wants to be)
> should list whats there in a flat space; eg "ls /dev" should show all dev
> entries. This is why current /dev doesn't work really; device files are
ls -R /dev *would* show all entries, and only existant entires, in devFS.
> there even if the device isn't. Never mind that even with devFS "ls -r /dev"
> shows huge amounts of crap. What was wrong with hd[ab...yz][123..89]?
>
> </rant>
>
> [snip]
>
> Thomas
Reply to: