Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-15,: Re: devfs - why not ?

# Re: devfs - why not ?

Richard Gooch (rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca)
Thu, 13 Apr 2000 21:34:26 -0600

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Richard Gooch: "Re: Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Previous message: Richard Gooch: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
- Next in thread: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"

Kelsey Hudson writes:
> > Whats this c0t0d0s3. Thats woefully inadequate to describe a volume that
> > is on a kernel managed multichanger on a fibrechannel fabric 8)
>
> That's solaris' way of definig a device:
>
> controller 0
> target 0
> device 0
> slice 3
>
> i do agree with mr. cox here though; it is very inadequate. Something
> along the lines of
>
> /dev/bus/scsi0/id0/lun0/slice3
>
> would be much more descriptive, and organized in a much simpler way,
> IMO.

Hm. My (devfs) box looks like this:
% df
Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Available Capacity Mounted on
/dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part2
1034712 347121 677069 34% /
/dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part1
47760 1808 43544 4% /var
/dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part5
103519 83 98217 0% /tmp
/dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part7
583091 233048 344019 40% /home

Regards,

Richard....
Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au
Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca

-
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.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Richard Gooch: "Re: Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Previous message: Richard Gooch: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
- Next in thread: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"