From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263795AbUHGRf3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:35:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263806AbUHGRf3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:35:29 -0400 Received: from ppp3-adsl-39.the.forthnet.gr ([193.92.234.39]:18216 "EHLO ppp1-100.the.forthnet.gr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263795AbUHGRfV (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:35:21 -0400 From: V13 To: Joerg Schilling Subject: Re: PATCH: cdrecord: avoiding scsi device numbering for ide devices Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 20:37:18 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.82 Cc: mj@ucw.cz, James.Bottomley@steeleye.com, axboe@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200408071217.i77CHUKm006973@burner.fokus.fraunhofer.de> In-Reply-To: <200408071217.i77CHUKm006973@burner.fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200408072037.23081.v13@priest.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 07 August 2004 15:17, Joerg Schilling wrote: > From the > 20 platforms that libscg provides abstractions from, _most_ > > platforms do not allow the "UNIX" /dev/something method to work with > Generic SCSI: > [listt #1] > > These are the platforms where /dev/something could work: > [list #2] > > As you see, the vast majority does not allow the adressing method the > people on LKML seem to prefer recently. First of all, you're comparing non-unix to unix operating systems and you're trying to create a universal naming scheme. At exactly the same time, those operating systems that you're refering to are not able to distinguish between two identical USB recorders. So, lets say for windows, you believe that when having two identical USB CDRs plugged in, it is better for the user to refer to them as 1,0,0 and 1,1,0 instead of K: and L: ? For me none of this makes sense, but I believe that the user will prefer the letter naming scheme. I believe that X:Y:Z makes sense when dealing with devices that can have an ID by attaching a jumper but not for the 2004 devices. My point is that you cannot blame linux for beeing correct. The behaviour of the OSes that you're describing may be portable but is not user friendly or correct (in fact, it can be called broken). I believe that if you were trying to create a new naming scheme you'd create something similar to /udev. You'd use names for devices and let the user or other programs associate those names to each hardware device instead of using numbers that some times are fixed and some times are changing between each boot. You've created a great tool that is used by almost every non-windows user out here and it would be great if you could try to make it more usable and 'correct'. <>