From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Jul 26 0:53:51 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A73437B652; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 00:53:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA16937; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:53:41 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Adrian Chadd Cc: Matthew Jacob , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: How much do we need the all-singing, all-dancing devfs? In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:56:11 +0200." <20000726095611.B68912@ywing.creative.net.au> Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:53:40 +0200 Message-ID: <16935.964598020@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20000726095611.B68912@ywing.creative.net.au>, Adrian Chadd writes: >ok. There should not be a reason why you can't simply register your FC >devices as '/dev/fc/$label' or even '/dev/$label' rather than '/dev/da1a'. >A "true" devfs would not pretend to impose a "%s%d", majorstring, minorunit >type namespace in front of all devices, and so neither should you. >If you have a generic FC layer which handles mapping physical devices to >logical devices, I can't see a problem here. Devfs will give each device a "canonical name" and as many aliases as you like. The aliases will show up as symlinks. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD coreteam member | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message