Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-31,: Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)

# Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)

Stephen Frost (sfrost@snowman.net)
Sat, 8 Aug 1998 02:50:07 -0400 (EDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Johan_Myr=E9en?=: "Re: xterm: no available ptys - 115"
- Previous message: Jon M. Taylor: "Re: Stack Smashing and no-exec"

On Fri, 7 Aug 1998, Anthony Barbachan wrote:

> >On Thu, 6 Aug 1998, Anthony Barbachan wrote:
> >
> >> >> I do not know about it similarity to other UNIX's (other than SUN/SCO)
> >> but
> >> >> /dev/sda is definately simple. As far a company goes they are not
> going
> >> to
> >> >> care if their drive is named /dev/sda or /dev/dsk/sd/c0t0d0u0
> (whatever).
> >> >
> >> > Except that it is MUCH easier to find a physical disk if you know the
> >> >controller and target id of it.
> >>
> >> True but this could also be done with /dev/c0t0l0 (c = controller, t =
> >> target, l = LUN) And I was mainly arguing against the previous writer's
> >> insistance that having equally cryptic names will help Linux compete in
> >> business.
> >
> > Except that you need slice in there somewhere, unless you wanted
> >a directory for the /dev/c0t0l0, but that doesn't make much sense...
> >
>
> I know, just left it out, no sense adding the obvious. Add a p0 to the end.
> And my argument is more directed to those devices which have low population
> limits by nature.

I would agree w/ you there, if it has a low population
limit by nature perhaps whatever is currently being used will
be sufficiant, though we have to make sure that what we think
has a low population limit by nature is actually the case.

> > I don't think Linux would have any problem competeing for
> >business if it used a /dev/c0t0d0u0 or whatever naming scheme, in fact
> >I think it would help it to break into SUN shops. The /dev/sda naming
> >scheme I feel would hurt when it comes to trying to get into businesses
> >because it is very limited, and puts in place some rather hard limits.
> >
>
> Not really. After all there's nothing preventing us from looping to
> /dev/sd1a after /dev/sdz. Or for hard coded device names /dev/sd1a for disk
> at ID 0 on controller 2 and /dev/sda for disk at ID 0 on controller 1, etc.

Except that it only kind of makes sense, if that.

Stephen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

- Next message: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Johan_Myr=E9en?=: "Re: xterm: no available ptys - 115"
- Previous message: Jon M. Taylor: "Re: Stack Smashing and no-exec"