interesting article, for all those who think Ubuntu is already easy

[Alan McKinnon]

On Tuesday 30 May 2006 10:50, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > I replied that udev fixes this. When the kernel sends a udev
> > event, the OS is in a position to note that this is a drive never
> > used on this machine before an ask the user what to call the
> > *drive* in future, giving the user persistent repeatable names to
> > different drives. The udev framework to do this is there. The
> > userland tools to respond are not there - that's the day that
> > will come soon. Meanwhile he can edit his rules files by hand.
>
> No, you misunderstand me; this is exactly what I was talking about
> and it's not going to happen in a million years.

You are not answering our questions. You keep saying it's bad but 
don't say why it's bad.

So, why is it bad?

> (Note: dpkg -s udev | grep Maintainer)

What does the identity of the maintainer have to do with it? Maybe he 
knows more about the subject than you do, maybe not. But saying what 
you said is just an ad-hominem.

Example: If you submitted a patch to Linus that moves most of X.org 
into near kernel space ala Windows, and he told you to piss off, 
would you claim your patch was correct and Linus was wrong?

> Nobody should care what /dev/sdXY a device gets, that's a temporary
> name assigned for that session only -- use persistent names such as
> /dev/disk/* 

Without udev, how will I be able to guarantee that device X is always 
assigned to /dev/disk/*?

> or use the desktop software which translates device 
> information into useful descriptions and icons.

And if the user doesn't use Gnome, what then? Are *box/e/fvwm users 
left out in the cold? What if the machine doesn't run X - the user 
still wants to access the device easily as much as a GUI user does.

I still maintain that device naming is a kernel function, and that it 
can be handed off the userspace for further processing. Then the 
entire system knows about the device and can use it. I really don't 
see the sense in doing this higher up the order - it's a basic system 
function.

-- 
If only me, you and dead people understand hex, 
how many people understand hex?

Alan McKinnon
alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za
+27 82, double three seven, one nine three five