On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
> If memory serves me right, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > This one does not resolve the controller problem either as
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said.
> >
> > So, I guess dac0t0, dac0t1, ... dac3t4, will be good enough if we want
> > to be short, but anything shorter than this will be meaningless.
>
> Well...I personally prefer the short names. On systems with multiple
> controllers, the commercial UNIX I used (Ultrix) just continued its
> numbering with rz0, rz1, rz2, ..., rz6, rz7, rz8, ... FreeBSD lets you
> do exactly the same thing.
>
> Having long device names is confusing to users who only have one disk
> controller (and I'd bet this is the vast majority). It took me a long
The vast majority has just one disk. Given the fast growth in disk sizes,
that majority will not decrease.
> time to grok the syntax of Solaris device names and I still get confused
> about this. Commercial or free doesn't have anything to do with this
> issue...this scheme would force users to remember and type extra
> characters that many of them don't need. (/dev/da0s1a is long enough,
> but /dev/dac0t0d0s1a is a little ridiculous for someone that has only
> one controller and one drive.)
>
If you want to *SOLVE* the problem, then make the disk wiring happen
before the kernel is booted. After all, we have a real cute boot loader
that can definately load the /boot/disk.wire file 8-)
The problem after all is *NOT* one of names but that disks not change
names unless the administrator wishes so. It doesn't matter the least how
we call them.
[snip]
> Cheers,
>
> Bruce.
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
