udev vs. devfs

ozar · 2005-06-19 19:18:44

I've already migrated to udev (and painlessly I might add), but it's my understanding that devfs is almost out the door:

http://archlinux.org/news.php#157

Which one are you guys/gals using?

xerxes2 · 2005-06-19 19:22:12

it's also wise to go back to /dev/hdx scheme because that will also be taken out of the kernel,

iBertus · 2005-06-19 19:30:59

my understanding is that arch's udev config makes symlinks in the /dev/discs/discX/partY format for backwards compatibility.

xerxes2 · 2005-06-19 19:33:11

yes it does but you have to have it in your bootmanagers conf file so you better go back to the old scheme over all,

iBertus · 2005-06-19 19:45:13

i agree. makes not sense to mix and match.

Duke · 2005-06-19 21:12:58

The old way is better anyways

But, what about people that use neither? Not that I'd want to though...

keevn7 · 2005-06-19 22:15:18

I use udev, and have used it since early last year. I painlessly switched to it, and devfs does not even exist in my kernel. So wee.

IceRAM · 2005-06-19 22:19:01

I use udev, but my only problem is the next: trying to fix LILO from ArchLinux install CD fails if I am using the new naming scheme in /etc/lilo.conf, that's because the CD is running with DevFS.

I will be waiting for the next Udev-only version of the Install CD and then... no fear of breaking the Linux box

tomk · 2005-06-19 23:23:13

Using udev, (almost) never used devfs. I came straight from static /dev with Debian to udev with Arch on my laptop, with devfs used for install only. None of my kernels have devfs.

Slightly OT - compared to the painless udev migration on Arch, I gave up on udev on Debian. My sarge NFS/CUPS server is still static, which is one of the reasons I will be upgrading it to Arch as soon as I get the time.

ozar · 2005-06-20 00:09:59

xerxes2 wrote:

it's also wise to go back to /dev/hdx scheme because that will also be taken out of the kernel,

Yeah, I went with the /dev/hdx scheme when I migrated to udev, and everything worked without problem. I'm a bit surprised though that nobody has voted as still using devfs (as of this post).

Mith · 2005-06-20 01:57:59

ozar wrote:

xerxes2 wrote:
it's also wise to go back to /dev/hdx scheme because that will also be taken out of the kernel,
Yeah, I went with the /dev/hdx scheme when I migrated to udev, and everything worked without problem. I'm a bit surprised though that nobody has voted as still using devfs (as of this post).

I switched to udev after I saw the post on the mailling list that devfs will be removed.. the switch was amazingly painless!
How do I go to that /dev/hdx scheme? It looks like the /dev/discs/discX/ are only symlinks to the actual /dev/hdx .. so I just remove the /dev/discs/ directory and adjust the paths in grub and fstab?

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-06-20 03:19:49

Mith wrote:

ozar wrote:
xerxes2 wrote:
it's also wise to go back to /dev/hdx scheme because that will also be taken out of the kernel,
Yeah, I went with the /dev/hdx scheme when I migrated to udev, and everything worked without problem. I'm a bit surprised though that nobody has voted as still using devfs (as of this post).
I switched to udev after I saw the post on the mailling list that devfs will be removed.. the switch was amazingly painless!
How do I go to that /dev/hdx scheme? It looks like the /dev/discs/discX/ are only symlinks to the actual /dev/hdx .. so I just remove the /dev/discs/ directory and adjust the paths in grub and fstab?

I don't think you even have to remove the symlinks. I'm using the /dev/hdx scheme. Just change all your fstab and grub entries.

CyberTron · 2005-06-20 04:05:24

I am using udev, and has been as long as I remember *which might not be so long*

nah, I find both /dev/hdx and /dev/discs/discX schemes fine...the latter reminds me of sun solaris (although easier)

udev has always worked fine for me

keevn7 · 2005-06-20 04:28:52

I have used /dev/hdx forever, even when I used devfs. The installation of Arch is when I first really encountered /dev/discs/. heh

deficite · 2005-06-21 00:29:30

I use udev. I've been using it since I first read about it in the Arch Linux newsletter. I definitely like the /dev/xyz better than /dev/discs/discx/partx crap. I never even heard of the latter until I switched to Arch Linux.

I really like the way permissions are handled in udev, it makes life much easier.

sarah31 · 2005-06-21 14:21:48

don't use either. I liked devfs. Udev was way too high maintenance, finicky and seems to require outside apps too function ... which is awkward.

Dusty · 2005-06-21 14:37:47

udev isn't high maintenance or finicky anymore. You just experienced early adopter symptoms.

Dusty

CyberTron · 2005-06-21 14:52:50

To Sarah

just a question, how do one do without udev/devfs ? what things are different ? is there a /dev/hdX or how does is work? is it faster in some ways?

please explain (if you don't mind)

Dusty · 2005-06-21 14:59:33

http://wiki2.archlinux.org/index.php/Sw … om%20devfs

But I believe Sarah31 was referring to the fact that she doesn't use Linux. She likes to bring that up to get a rise out of people...

Dusty

CyberTron · 2005-06-21 16:58:32

aha....*funny *

btw, thanks for the link

jnengland77 · 2005-06-21 19:44:21

Switched to Udev only a few days ago but wow did it mess things up took 3 hours fixing it. Finally got it tho. damm i can't vote.. limit must be 70 o well i use uDev
I can't really tell the difference other then no kernel involved....

Meshuggin · 2005-06-22 00:09:31

Mith wrote:

I switched to udev after I saw the post on the mailling list that devfs will be removed..

Same thing here, it was hard, but now using udev 8)

sarah31 · 2005-06-22 03:19:58

CyberTron wrote:

To Sarah
just a question, how do one do without udev/devfs ? what things are different ? is there a /dev/hdX or how does is work? is it faster in some ways?
please explain (if you don't mind)

Yeah I got rid of my PC when I went back to using Macs only. Their subsystem is a combination of unix and their play on it.

Before i stopped using linux I had migrated back to udev but I was still having lots of issues with it.

CyberTron · 2005-06-22 07:56:39

sarah31 wrote:

Yeah I got rid of my PC when I went back to using Macs only. Their subsystem is a combination of unix and their play on it.
Before i stopped using linux I had migrated back to udev but I was still having lots of issues with it.

Ah, now I understand

been thinking of getting a mac too...(powerbook)..but i don't feel comfortable with only one mouse button (need three)

sarah31 · 2005-06-22 15:28:33

So buy a three button mouse. The reason they don't have more than one button is because if you are familiar with the OS you know you don't need one.

I use a two button wireless (not an Apple mouse) because I don't like how sensitive their mouse buttons are.

Arch Linux

#1 2005-06-19 19:18:44

udev vs. devfs

#2 2005-06-19 19:22:12

Re: udev vs. devfs

#3 2005-06-19 19:30:59

Re: udev vs. devfs

#4 2005-06-19 19:33:11

Re: udev vs. devfs

#5 2005-06-19 19:45:13

Re: udev vs. devfs

#6 2005-06-19 21:12:58

Re: udev vs. devfs

#7 2005-06-19 22:15:18

Re: udev vs. devfs

#8 2005-06-19 22:19:01

Re: udev vs. devfs

#9 2005-06-19 23:23:13

Re: udev vs. devfs

#10 2005-06-20 00:09:59

Re: udev vs. devfs

#11 2005-06-20 01:57:59

Re: udev vs. devfs

#12 2005-06-20 03:19:49

Re: udev vs. devfs

#13 2005-06-20 04:05:24

Re: udev vs. devfs

#14 2005-06-20 04:28:52

Re: udev vs. devfs

#15 2005-06-21 00:29:30

Re: udev vs. devfs

#16 2005-06-21 14:21:48

Re: udev vs. devfs

#17 2005-06-21 14:37:47

Re: udev vs. devfs

#18 2005-06-21 14:52:50

Re: udev vs. devfs

#19 2005-06-21 14:59:33

Re: udev vs. devfs

#20 2005-06-21 16:58:32

Re: udev vs. devfs

#21 2005-06-21 19:44:21

Re: udev vs. devfs

#22 2005-06-22 00:09:31

Re: udev vs. devfs

#23 2005-06-22 03:19:58

Re: udev vs. devfs

#24 2005-06-22 07:56:39

Re: udev vs. devfs

#25 2005-06-22 15:28:33

Re: udev vs. devfs

Board footer