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).
This will not affect companies one way or another; other than the fact that
/dev/sda saves a few seconds typing and prevent alot of typos. (Note: very
few, if not any, Sun/SCO admins that I know easily remember the device names
to their SCSI disks. Usually they curse and then look it up through vfstab
or /dev/dsk. This wastes some more minutes) Where naming can and probably
will make a difference is in the user who is used to A:,B:,C:,COM1,LPT1,etc.
This type of person would be more likely to curse not praise the verbosely
complex names that devfs "perfers" to use. I agree that SCSI definately
needs a change to support large numbers of controllers and disks but most
other devices EIDE,floppies,serial ports, etc do not and changing their
current simple device names only (after the only device names are removed,
which they will if devfs is added) breaks backward compatibility and adds to
the complexity of a Linux system. BTW, devfs is not consistant, at least
not to Solaris and perhaps (I do not remember) not to Unixware either.
-
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