why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

hypermegachi · 2004-07-26 01:47:38

subject says it all. every experienced linux user knows the difference between /dev/hda and /dev/hda1, and since arch currently is still a more advanced distro, why have the arch developers decided to use this new /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead?

Dusty · 2004-07-26 01:59:53

it's the default devfs naming scheme. Sarah thinks it's more sensible, I think it's a headache to type...

Since devfs is dead, it's possible, maybe probable that Arch will be migrating to standard naming schemes on udev. Currently udev supports both schemes in Arch, as it eased migration.

/dev/hda* symlinks exist so you can use those with devfs or udev if you prefer. In most cases, I do.

Dusty

slyski · 2004-07-27 02:18:08

it's cool to see how judd did that script on creating those links so to transition over to udev and back again if needed.

you can also just use /dev/hda(#) in fstab and lilo.conf, etc as you wish.

thanks judd and xentac

hypermegachi · 2004-07-27 06:56:13

for the most part, /dev/hd* works. but to boot into arch you _must_ use the long format or else you get some kinda error...well i do anyways

tpowa · 2004-07-27 08:58:21

@ dusty
it's the other way around hdxy is the node and the rest is linked to it

Dusty · 2004-07-27 16:10:44

tpowa wrote:

@ dusty
it's the other way around hdxy is the node and the rest is linked to it

Under udev, yes, but under devfs:

 ls hda* -l
lr-xr-xr-x  1 root root 32 Jul 27 03:48 hda -> ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/disc
lr-xr-xr-x  1 root root 33 Jul 27 03:48 hda1 -> ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1
lr-xr-xr-x  1 root root 33 Jul 27 03:48 hda2 -> ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part2
lr-xr-xr-x  1 root root 33 Jul 27 03:48 hda5 -> ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part5
lr-xr-xr-x  1 root root 33 Jul 27 03:48 hda6 -> ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part6

Dusty

tpowa · 2004-07-27 16:13:25

yeah you are right

slyski · 2004-07-28 01:05:26

the links change back and forth depending on which system (devfs or udev) you are firing up using the ' append="devfs=nomount" ' or not.

that is why i like udev, less typing and its cleaner in kwikdisk in the kde tray and kdiskfree.

happy udev(ising)

paranoos · 2004-07-30 08:05:27

although i wasn't a big fan of the extra typing, i really preferred devfs over the old-style dev system that i was used to in other distros... i didn't enjoy having device nodes for hdb4 when i don't even have that many partitions there, let alone even a drive.

udev gives the neatness of only creating device nodes that you have, plus keeping them short and easy to type.

it's nice to have both options though.

Arch Linux

#1 2004-07-26 01:47:38

why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

#2 2004-07-26 01:59:53

Re: why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

#3 2004-07-27 02:18:08

Re: why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

#4 2004-07-27 06:56:13

Re: why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

#5 2004-07-27 08:58:21

Re: why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

#6 2004-07-27 16:10:44

Re: why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

#7 2004-07-27 16:13:25

Re: why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

#8 2004-07-28 01:05:26

Re: why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

#9 2004-07-30 08:05:27

Re: why /dev/discs/disc0/part1 instead of /dev/hda1

Board footer