On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 07:55:03PM -0700, Bryan Kadzban wrote: > Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > > > I think you are stretching here a bit. I think there would be quite > > an outcry if sda and sdb were swapped just by rebooting (to the same > > drive). > > There might be an outcry, but I don't think it'd be that big. There > have been plans to require udev, by dynamically assigning major/minor > numbers, for years. (devtmpfs didn't exist at the time.) Once that's > in place, the response to any such outcry would be "use the symlinks > that udev provides", since those are stable regardless of discovery order. > Those who have been reading lkml in the past week or so will know that current udev (as in >= 182, if I read it correctly) is not flavour of the month - but, many of us manage to use it. If there is a problem, the response depends in part on who sees it (if it hits Linus, he won't be pleased), and on how long it takes for people to raise the problem. Increasingly, it seems like castles made of sand.
Meanwhile, I'm stuck in the shifting sands of mozilla-15.0.1 so I will probably be too busy banging my head against the wall to follow this thread ;) ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
