On Sat, Jan 28, 2006 at 01:08:48AM +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote: >Marty wrote: >>Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: >>>But none of the posters showed proof that with/without udev actually >>>makes a *difference* that makes the system run *better*, other than >>>the number of devices. So what? >>I could be wrong, but I thought the idea behind udev was that you don't >>have to manually create your devices. Reducing the number of device >>entries is but a side effect, something that you would expect if it's >>working properly. > >Another important point is that udev can make sure that a given device >always gets the same identifier, no matter what other devices were >plugged in before it. (Otherwise it's "first come, first served".) >Let's say you wrote a nice script to make backups of your important >data on a USB harddrive. If you happen to have connected a camera >before you plugged in the harddrive, your script might try to save your >data on the camera instead. With udev you can assign device names based >on serial numbers, MAC addresses and other unique properties. Your >script will then reliably save the data when using an identifier such >as "/dev/backupdrive". (You can assign whatever device name you like, >as long as it does not exist already.) udev furthermore works together >nicely with other packages to offer convenient ways to automount >devices, have icons appear on the desktop automatically, etc. >
It's even more fun when you have your root on SATA (or SCSI) and leave a USB memory stick in at boot time :-) /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://therning.org/magnus Software is not manufactured, it is something you write and publish. Keep Europe free from software patents, we do not want censorship by patent law on written works.
pgpgHJJpXqpME.pgp
Description: PGP signature