Re: udev device naming policy concerns
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Apr 02, Steve Greenland <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Clearly, the flat layout works. The major semi-technical objection to it
>> ("too may entries") is solved by udev.
> No. The major technical objection to the old-style layout is that
> non-positional names like sdX and hdX are a PITA for non-trivial systems
> because drives may change name when new ones are plugged in.
Isn't it possible to fix this in a sane way without switching to the devfs
system wholesale (given that devfs naming includes crazy things like LUN
directories for IDE drives)?
Just a thought.
Make sure your vote will count.