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

# Re: devfs - why not ?

Mark Zealey (kernel@itsolve.co.uk)
Fri, 14 Apr 2000 21:52:17 +0100 (BST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Ulrich Drepper: "Re: posix_fadvise"
- Previous message: Johannes Erdfelt: "Re: devfs "instant replay" (Was: devfs - why not ?)"
- Next in thread: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl: "/dev/volumes - was: Re: devfs - why not ?"

I personaly hate all of these tty0, tty1..... in /dev. My question is why
can't we have only those devices that are actually there, showing? For
ecample if there are (only) 2 IDE hard drives on channel 0, a master and
slave, instead of:
hda
hdb
hdc
hdd
...
and
sda
sdb
sdc
...
why can't there just be:
hda
hdb
? This seems very wierd to me, as most people don't have 16 IDE's, 16
SCSI's, 16 partitions on each. A simple solution would be to have 2 dirs,
/dev/in_use and /dev/not_in_use, or even to hide the devices not in use.

Cheers,

Mark Zealey
mark@itsolve.co.uk

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
UL++++$ (GCM/GCS/GS/GM)GUG! dpu? s-:-@ a15! C+++>$ P++$>+++@ L+++>+++++$
!E---? W+++>$ N++@>+ o->+ !K? w++(!---?) !O?@ !M--? !V--? PS- PE--@ Y@
!PGP----? !t---?@ !5---? !X---? !R- tv b+ !DI---? D G e->+++++ h+++*! r++
(www.geekcode.com)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

-
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: Ulrich Drepper: "Re: posix_fadvise"
- Previous message: Johannes Erdfelt: "Re: devfs "instant replay" (Was: devfs - why not ?)"
- Next in thread: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl: "/dev/volumes - was: Re: devfs - why not ?"