Arch confuses me.

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-05-03 23:05:36

Arch confuses me with the format of devices:

/dev/discs/disc0/part1

I am obviously used to this:

/dev/hda1

I know I can change this, because I read a small bit about it yesterday, but I can't find it today. Can someone lead me in the correct direction?

i3839 · 2005-05-03 23:17:30

Read this (see for more info also the other wiki pages).

Basically the weird naming stuff comes from devfs, but can also be used with udev with the right config.

cactus · 2005-05-03 23:37:07

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/devfs-guid … =printable
http://www.vandekamer.com/linux/devfs.asp

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-05-04 00:21:44

okay, it makes sense. But heres what i don't understand....why is my hard drive:
/dev/discs/disc0/part1
and not:
/dev/scsi...

phrakture · 2005-05-04 01:37:48

because it's not a scsi drive?
if it were scsi, it would be /dev/sda by the udev scheme, in the first post you mentioned /dev/hda - implying an ide drive

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-05-04 03:06:09

your right its not an scsi drive, but it is S-ATA. It is named /dev/sda. But say that is the case...why not /dev/ide/...

cactus · 2005-05-04 03:18:47

because IDE is not sata.
discs implies more than one drive type
ide is ata
eide is atapi
then there is sata

Likely it is for the sake of brevity that discs is used.
http://www.ata-atapi.com/

other than that..no idea..

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-05-04 03:59:03

so if i use an ata. Will the device be listed as /dev/ide...?

twpvw5 · 2005-05-04 03:59:47

my sata drive is /dev/sda

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-05-04 04:03:02

thats what mine is normally.

phrakture · 2005-05-04 04:10:02

ok, the issue here is two things:
devfs (obsolete) uses the naming scheme - /dev/discs/discX/partY
udev uses the more common scheme - /dev/hda, /dev/sda

an ide drive is "/dev/hda, /dev/hdb, /dev/hdc" (hard disk A/B/C)
scsi drives/sata drives are "/dev/sda, /dev/sdb, /dev/sdc" (scsi disk A/B/C)

does that help?

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-05-04 13:49:27

thats not exactly what i was wondering...It doesn't matter anyways...I'm switching to udev later on today anyways.

lanrat · 2005-05-04 22:39:44

If you switch and upgrade to the latest udev (057) don't forget to read this thread:
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=12071

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-05-04 23:58:48

yeah, i saw that the other day.

Arch Linux

#1 2005-05-03 23:05:36

Arch confuses me.

#2 2005-05-03 23:17:30

Re: Arch confuses me.

#3 2005-05-03 23:37:07

Re: Arch confuses me.

#4 2005-05-04 00:21:44

Re: Arch confuses me.

#5 2005-05-04 01:37:48

Re: Arch confuses me.

#6 2005-05-04 03:06:09

Re: Arch confuses me.

#7 2005-05-04 03:18:47

Re: Arch confuses me.

#8 2005-05-04 03:59:03

Re: Arch confuses me.

#9 2005-05-04 03:59:47

Re: Arch confuses me.

#10 2005-05-04 04:03:02

Re: Arch confuses me.

#11 2005-05-04 04:10:02

Re: Arch confuses me.

#12 2005-05-04 13:49:27

Re: Arch confuses me.

#13 2005-05-04 22:39:44

Re: Arch confuses me.

#14 2005-05-04 23:58:48

Re: Arch confuses me.

Board footer