Re: udev device naming policy concerns
Paul Hampson wrote:
<snip>
> I think the devfs naming scheme is better personally, as it gives you a
> structured view of what's in the system, and a structured way of dealing
> with devices... (IE v4l stuff lives in /dev/video, easy.)
>
> On the other hand, I can understand your point about not migrating away
> from the documented, standardised approach, (ugly as it may be :-)...
>
> The current default files create nodes in the devfs places, and symlink
> to the kernel names for the ide/scsi stuff. Maybe it ought to create
> nodes with the kernel names, and symlink to the devfs-style names?
That would be a rather nice default, actually. :-) My vote's for that.
--
Nathanael Nerode <neroden at gcc.gnu.org>
US citizens: if you're considering voting for Bush, look at these first:
http://www.misleader.org/ http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/politicsandscience/
Reply to: