On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 03:55:45PM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:46 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > Ok, now that devfs is removed from the 2.6 kernel tree[1], I think it's > > time to start to revisit some of the /dev naming rules that we currently > > are living with[2]. > > > > To start with, the 061 version of udev offers a big memory savings if > > you use the "default" kernel name of a device[3]. If you do that, it does > > not create a file in its database in /dev/.udevdb/ > > > > If we can move away from some of our devfs-like names, we stand to > > reclaim a lot of memory from everyone's machines. As an example, if we > > drop all of the tty/pts/vc/vcc symlinks, and just go with the default > > kernel name, we save 2.5Mb of space in tempfs/ramfs. I've done this on > > my machines and everything seems to work just fine (it looks like > > everything that was trying to use a tty node was just using the symlink > > anyway.) > > > > So, anyone have any objections to me changing the default udev naming > > scheme in this manner? > > > > Fine with me. I assume we will need to keep the rcscript support for > those die-hard 2.4 users still, but hopefully we can eventually drop > that as well.
What rcscript support? > > Next up, that loony block device naming scheme (more on that later...) > > > > Heh. I hope that we will still at least just do the cdsymlinks stuff > (just the /dev/cdrom, /dev/dvd, etc stuff) as that do make things a bit > easier for multimedia stuff. Yes, I don't see us dropping that, as it's just too useful :) > > [3] HAL needs a patch to be able to handle this. It's posted on the > > hal development mailing lists and will be checked in real-soon-now. > > I just think we need to make sure this is in first ... The HAL patch? It's now in HAL's cvs tree, don't know when they will do a new release. > Lastly on an unrelated note ... I have a rule: > > ----- > # cat /etc/udev/rules.d/40-dm.rules > KERNEL="dm-[0-9]*", PROGRAM="/sbin/devmap_name %M %m", NAME="mapper/%c", > SYMLINK="%c" > ----- > > And in theory it should be the last rule to set the name ... however the > default one in 50-udev.rules overrides it, and I have to add > OPTIONS="last_rule" Yes. Want me to just change the default rule to yours? thanks, greg k-h -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
