From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932480AbWBIOzR (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2006 09:55:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932511AbWBIOzR (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2006 09:55:17 -0500 Received: from ns9.hostinglmi.net ([213.194.149.146]:4255 "EHLO ns9.hostinglmi.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932480AbWBIOzQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2006 09:55:16 -0500 Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 15:55:42 +0100 From: DervishD To: Joerg Schilling Cc: peter.read@gmail.com, matthias.andree@gmx.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jim@why.dont.jablowme.net Subject: Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) Message-ID: <20060209145542.GA94@DervishD> Mail-Followup-To: Joerg Schilling , peter.read@gmail.com, matthias.andree@gmx.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jim@why.dont.jablowme.net References: <200602031724.55729.luke@dashjr.org> <43E7545E.nail7GN11WAQ9@burner> <73d8d0290602060706o75f04c1cx@mail.gmail.com> <43E7680E.2000506@gmx.de> <20060206205437.GA12270@voodoo> <43E89B56.nailA792EWNLG@burner> <20060207183712.GC5341@voodoo> <43E9F1CD.nail2BR11FL52@burner> <20060208210219.GB9166@DervishD> <43EB1912.nail7EL11L90P@burner> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <43EB1912.nail7EL11L90P@burner> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Organization: DervishD X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns9.hostinglmi.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - dervishd.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Joerg :) * Joerg Schilling dixit: > DervishD wrote: > > other half doesn't have it probably has a bad user interface. You > > know that if a program uses a naming convention different from ALL > > the rest of programs is because the program has a problem. You know > > that if the only UNIX program out there that doesn't use /dev entries > > to talk to devices is cdrecord, the problem *probably* is in > > cdrecord, and not in UNIX... > > So why do you like to introduce a different naming scheme? Exactly, Joerg, why do YOU like to introduce a different naming scheme? UNIX uses /dev/whatever, Win32 uses :, etc. Why do you want to break those names, which are familiar to the user? > Look into the real world and you will find that most SCSI related > programs use a namischscheme that is either identical to what > cdrecord does or a very similar one. I don't know any program, except cdrecord and family, which uses your naming scheme, but I will more than happy to hear examples, look at them and change my mind if I finally get convinced that the naming scheme you're using is finally better. But instead of telling me to look into the real world, tell me examples, please. I don't have at home any SCSI bus and so I don't use SCSI related programs. Thanks in advance :) Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado -- Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net http://www.pleyades.net & http://www.gotesdelluna.net It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to... RAmen!