On Sat, Jan 28, 2006 at 01:08:48AM +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote: >Marty wrote: >>Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: >>>But none of the posters showed proof that with/without udev actually >>>makes a *difference* that makes the system run *better*, other than >>>the number of devices. So what? >>I could be wrong, but I thought the idea behind udev was that you don't >>have to manually create your devices. Reducing the number of device >>entries is but a side effect, something that you would expect if it's >>working properly. > >Another important point is that udev can make sure that a given device >always gets the same identifier, no matter what other devices were >plugged in before it. (Otherwise it's "first come, first served".) >Let's say you wrote a nice script to make backups of your important >data on a USB harddrive. If you happen to have connected a camera >before you plugged in the harddrive, your script might try to save your >data on the camera instead. With udev you can assign device names based >on serial numbers, MAC addresses and other unique properties. Your >script will then reliably save the data when using an identifier such >as "/dev/backupdrive". (You can assign whatever device name you like, >as long as it does not exist already.) udev furthermore works together >nicely with other packages to offer convenient ways to automount >devices, have icons appear on the desktop automatically, etc. > It's even more fun when you have your root on SATA (or SCSI) and leave a USB memory stick in at boot time :-) /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus@therning.org http://therning.org/magnus Software is not manufactured, it is something you write and publish. Keep Europe free from software patents, we do not want censorship by patent law on written works.
Attachment:
pgpwcNIz6ERAe.pgp
Description: PGP signature