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

["Arthur Pemberton" <pemboa gmail com>]

On Jan 11, 2008 3:44 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell gmail com> wrote:
>
> Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> > On Jan 11, 2008 2:30 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell gmail com> wrote:
> >> It doesn't seem as sensible as being able to plug into a known
> >> controller position and get a known device name, particularly in the
> >> scenario where the drives aren't hot-plug and you want to access a bunch
> >> of new ones after a reboot and know which is which.
> >
> >
> > Frankly i like this idea, but I'm unsure of the practicality of it:
> >
> > What is the highest level which is even aware of the physical location
> > of said device? I would imagine the BIOS knows, and maybe some really
> > low level kernel modules but anything above that?
>
> The bios doesn't necessarily know anything except for the one(s) that it
> might boot.  But I think there may be some extra magic in what the
> kernel does with the names depending on which drive bios used to boot.
> The stuff in /dev/disk/by-path might be useful for the versions that
> have it, but I can't see anything for the empty controller positions
> where the drives aren't connected so the arrangement doesn't make a lot
> of sense.


Then it seems to me that what you/i/we want can be accomplished with
soem clever udev rules.

-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )