[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Linux is not about choice [was Re: Fedora too cutting edge?]

David Zeuthen wrote:

Is it a user program that has changed my /dev/hdX into /dev/sdX more or less arbitrarily - or turns what used to be detected as eth0 into eth2 when a different kernel is booted? Admittedly it has been a while since I've used Solaris, but I can't recall anything like that ever happening with it. In a unix-like system where access to everything is through its device/file name, what is more fundamental than that?

This is a flawed example. The problem is that you're relying on names
assigned in an irregular fashion and it will happen on Solaris as well
if you move disks between controllers etc.

But the old names were predictable; the new ones aren't - when I move a disk to a new controller/drive position, I know about it.

The way to do this in the
modern world is to rely on persistent names. See /dev/disk/* and the
udev rules for stable network interface names.  Of course you can argue
that e.g. /dev/sda or /dev/hda should stay stable but I doubt you're
going to find much sympathy for such a point of view.

What I actually would argue is that a distribution making such changes should supply tools to migrate configurations based on old conventions to the new ones. Maybe Fedora doesn't have users with hundreds of machines and data that needs to span years of operation, but a unix-like system should be designed to make that practical.

  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell gmail com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]