Yes, it does. I was proposing that we use a single naming scheme with
conceptual unity and simplicity, instead of having a cryptic "advanced"
naming scheme and a simple "backwards-compatible" naming scheme.
Instead, we could have a single naming scheme in which names get
gradually more complex as you do more arcane things with your machine.
The devfs method reminds me of pasted-on GUIs. As long as you're doing
something simple, you can use the pasted-on GUI, but when you want to
do something more difficult, suddenly you're thrust into the
command-line world where everything is totally different. I think this
is an abomination.
> > /dev/sd_c1_a1 is /dev/dsk/c1t0d0s0
> > /dev/sda_d1_ is /dev/dsk/c0t0d1*
>
> I don't really see the point in using /dev/sd_*, if I understand
> correctly it isn't currently supported that way and, well, at least to me
> it looks ugly, if we're going to do something new, let's just do it right.
Well, it does look pretty ugly. (I think it's not as bad as Solaris's
/dev/dsk, but maybe you disagree.)
> > (I think devfs is a really good idea. But I like Plan9, too.)
>
> No clue what 'Plan9' is...
It's an OS that uses something similar to devfs for its devices. I
think you can find more information about it at plan9.bell-labs.com
when it's up.
Kragen
-
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