Actually, you have said that in time the "old" names will be thrown
out. Now, I can't promise that Linus wouldn't do that, but I'm sure
he'd only do it with wide support.
Furthermore, even if the "old" names were removed from devfs, you
could still have them by not running devfs in the first place: the
major&minor scheme isn't going to go away (POSIX mandates them).
As I've said before: the IDE situtation is going to get more
SCSI-like, according to the ex-IDE guys. The new IDE naming scheme in
devfs is for future-proofing.
> >There *is* a need for a naming scheme like the new SCSI names, at
> >least for big systems. People with small systems or who don't like the
> >new names can use the existing names. But that should stop people with
> >big systems being allowed to have a location-based naming scheme.
>
> I am not against the name change where it is needed, like SCSI, but EIDE
> devices definately do not need it, nor do other devices.
Like I said, IDE is moving towards SCSI. Furthermore, the new names
make /dev less cluttered and more organised. Administrators should be
given that choice.
Regards,
Richard....
-
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