3 Days Wasted Trying To Make Linux Work. 1042

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, iforone wrote on 28 Apr 2006 11:57:19 -0700

Depends on one's viewpoint. For someone familiar with Unix and standards, Windows is problematic. For someone familiar with Windows...well... :-)

Me, I'm familiar with Linux, but the OP was apparently not.

Hm. Good point. I'm not that up on RAID.

There's three other nomenclatures. I don't know how precisely to characterize the one except that it had nodenames like c6d0h0s0 (I have no idea about the letter ordering though). It used to be popular (and probably still is) on HP-UX, and the card was presumably SCSI ID 6.

The second isdev-discs-discx-party, which is admittedly fairly reasonable, except that discx depends on, presumably, the discovery order.

A third may be brand new and is showing up on my experimental machine.dev-disk-by-path-pci-0000:00:02.5-ide-0:0-part1dev-disk-by-path-pci-0000:00:0a.0-scsi-0:0:3:0-part2

There's alsodev-disk-by-idanddev-disk-by-uuid. The latter looks very useful if one loves to play disk shuffle; one presumably can always refer to a disk parbreastion by its uuid.

This might be a 2.6ism, as it's showing up on my other 2.6 machine as well.

To some extent. There's issues if one adds or removes a disk, but then there's *always* issues if one adds or removes a disk in a non-RAID environment. :-)

Not sure how one would "dispute" it anyway. It's straightforward enough, so it doesn't bother me overmuch.

I don't see why that is an issue per se. A disk is a disk; one can open it, seek to the relevant block, read the block. There might be issues with other equipment (e.g., scsi tapes and scsi scanners).

Then again,dev-sda was put into place quite some time ago.

Ah, removables. It's a pity my Syquests died...but I also had an issue with a game (Wheel Of Time) that referred to the CD-ROM by drive letter. I put another hard drive in the system and confused the poor thing. Fortunately, editing the registry isn't difficult, just necessary. :-P

In Linux this isn't nearly as bad an issue.

Gotta love the ordering, though. Consistent orderings might be more along the lines of

dev-hda1 = C:dev-hda5 = D:dev-hda6 = E:dev-hdb1 = F:dev-hdb2 = G:dev-hdb3 = H:dev-cdrom = I:

(type-parbreastion-spindle)

or

dev-hda1 = C:dev-hdb1 = D:dev-hda5 = E:dev-hdb5 = F:dev-hda6 = G:dev-hdb6 = H:dev-cdrom = I:

(type-spindle-parbreastion)

but the way it actually occurs (according to the above) is:

dev-hda1 = C:dev-hdb1 = D:dev-hda5 = E:dev-hda6 = F:dev-hdb5 = G:dev-hdb6 = H:dev-cdrom = I:

(??!)

One wonders wheredev-hda2 ordev-hdb2 will occur in this mess, buttuming they're formatted so that Windows can understand them as more than a "Drive J: appears to be a foreign parbreastion. Shall I reformat it for you? Y-N". :-)

Gaaaaah!

rest snipped

-- Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.