Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 14:50:02 +0300 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> Cc: FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Switch from legacy ata(4) to CAM-based ATA Message-ID: <20110421115002.GL48734@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1104201633420.94458@ns1.feral.com> References: <4DAEAE1B.70207@FreeBSD.org> <20110420203754.GM85668@acme.spoerlein.net> <4DAF46F8.9040004@FreeBSD.org> <BCE89DC7-116D-48E1-BD86-DF986062B0CC@samsco.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1104201633420.94458@ns1.feral.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 04:35:58PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2011, Scott Long wrote: > >... > > > >I agree with what Alexander is saying, but I'd like to take it a step > >further. We should all be using either mount-by-label, or be working to > >introduce generic device names to GEOM. Right now, device names are an > >implementation detail that have no functional use other than to > >complicate the fstab. Disks exposed through the block layer are simply > >direct-access block-array devices, nothing more. There's no functional > >difference to the kernel or userland between ad, ar, da, aacd, mfid, > >amrd, etc when it comes to reading and writing sectors off of them. > >But yet we give them unique names and pretend that those names mean > >something. We could give them all the name of "disk" and the system > >would still function exactly that same. The name attributes are > >interesting when it comes to doing out-of-band management, but it's also > >trivial to create a human-readable map and a programatic API between the > >generic name and the attribute name. Same goes for volumes labels, and > >I'd almost argue that they're more powerful than generic device names. > > > >In other words, "ada" isn't the problem here, it's that we all still > >think in terms of the 1980's when systems didn't autoconfigure and > >device names were important hints to system functionality. That time > >has thankfully passed, and it's time for us to catch up. > > > > Still, keep in mind that conservative leanings have to be appeased. Back > in SparcStation1 development (1989) we kept on calling the root device > "Fred" as in "Let's boot fred now". > > That said, you would not *believe* the flack I took for having the root > filesystem on sd3 instead of sd0 in SS1, even though there was no reason > it couldn't have just been called "fred". It was YOU ?! Could you, please, share a story ? I am very interested. Thanks in advance. [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk2wGekACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4j5vQCgsOXooO0+Fm28/gD1+gJA2vbg DDsAoPYKIBxAdapHcOPdUL7bH/QmcVfj =e+JM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110421115002.GL48734>