On 12-04-26 at 10:23am, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 09:27:43AM +0300, Eray Aslan wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 03:23:18AM +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote: > > > I think Arto Jantunen explained it pretty well earlier in this > > > thread: > > > > Reliability in the case of modern kernels and modern hardware > > > > means event based, not static. The hardware in a modern computer > > > > comes and goes as it pleases (usb devices being the worst > > > > example, but scanning > > > > That's the thing. Hardware do not come and go as it pleases on my > > servers and I do not want anything happening when someone inserts a > > usb device. It's nice on my laptop but not on my servers. > > It comes and goes on my servers. I bring online new storage devices, > and change their sizes when I decide I want more space. Sometimes I > bring online a lot of temporary space and then take it away when I'm > done. These are production servers with Fibre Channel attached storage > and this is not a unique use case. Having to manually fiddle with > rescan-scsi-bus etc to see the new devices is a PITA and I welcome any > attempt to make this a more seamless process. > > Don't assume dynamic device detection is only about personal machines > or USB. It's useful in a much wider context. Agreed it is *useful* in many cases. But I also agree that it is not *required* in *all* cases. I believe Debian still supports running locally compiled kernels which do not depend on udev, and that some setups do not require udev either (not everyone use fibre channel). - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature