From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Nov 30 22:34:25 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA11002
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 30 Nov 1997 22:34:25 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from whistle.com (s205m131.whistle.com [207.76.205.131])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10996
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun, 30 Nov 1997 22:34:22 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from archie@whistle.com)
Received: (from smap@localhost) by whistle.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id WAA20989; Sun, 30 Nov 1997 22:33:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bubba.whistle.com(207.76.205.7) by whistle.com via smap (V1.3)
	id sma020985; Sun Nov 30 22:33:22 1997
Received: (from archie@localhost) by bubba.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) id WAA15641; Sun, 30 Nov 1997 22:33:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>
Message-Id: <199712010633.WAA15641@bubba.whistle.com>
Subject: Re: detecting devfs from userland?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.971130210818.10375B-100000@current1.whistle.com> from Julian Elischer at "Nov 30, 97 09:14:18 pm"
To: julian@whistle.com (Julian Elischer)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 22:33:21 -0800 (PST)
Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, dk+@ua.net, proff@iq.org,
        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


> > > > The devices themselves, especially in the new SLICE stuff that
> > > > he's done, should be self-referrential.  I'm still trying to
> > > > talk him into putting them in a hierarchy (with little success...
> > > > you SVR4 device name traditionalists can rest easy: you still get
> > > > you have your long cryptic device names for now...).
> > > 
> > > A hierarchy is good but has the following problems
> > > 
> > > 1/ violates "Principle of least surprise" (POLS) 
> > 
> > I disagree (big surprise ;-)).  I think /dev/sd1c1d2t0 violates the
> > principle...  At least with a hierarchy, you get a hierarchy in /dev
> > that matches the hierarchy on disk.  Better to have a valid map with
> > a "you are here.." than an invalid map, IMO...
> 
> I think people expect to find their disk listed as: /dev/foobar3
> not as /dev/disk/scsi3/unit3/lun2/partion4

What's wrong with having both? That is, let /dev/sd0s1 be a symlink
to /dev/sd0/slice1. Symlinks could also help the sd0a -> sd0s1a problem.

-Archie

___________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs   *   Whistle Communications, Inc.  *   http://www.whistle.com