On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Tim wrote: > On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 12:31 -0400, Matthew Saltzman wrote: > > Doesn't it make you nostalgic for the MS-DOS/Windows notion of > > drive letters? Man, compared to this, that was simplicity itself. > > 8^) 8^) (and just for emphasis) 8^) > > NO! What drive letter will my second partition be today? Will it > be "d" (as I'd like), or "e" (because there's a CD-ROM)? Will it be > "f" because I plugged in another drive, even though I plugged it in > later in the chain. > > Likewise for booting from a CD. After doing so, the drive letters > can re-arrange, especially if the CD installed some pseudo device. > > It's that sort of crap (shuffling positions) that made me dispair of > the decision to make all Linux hard drives /dev/sd<something>. that's why i prefer to use LVM, where the mount info is based on the names i gave the logical volumes: $ mount ... /dev/mapper/f8-opt on /opt type ext3 (rw) /dev/mapper/f8-var on /var type ext3 (rw) /dev/mapper/f8-usr on /usr type ext3 (rw) /dev/mapper/f8-usrlocal on /usr/local type ext3 (rw) ... and even if you're not using LVM, you can always still mount by filesystem volume name; i just consider the "named" mount info a nice bonus of using LVM. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca ========================================================================
