On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 18:49:29 -0500 Michael Mol <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > As I said about my ex once, time tells. Sometimes, time is the > > only thing that does tell too. Reminds me of wine although I don't > > drink it. > > I think it's absolutely ridiculous to look at udev and mdev as winner > or loser. I'm not trying to be even-handed or fair in this; I just > think they service different needs. > > Currently, the only advantage I see for udev in a server is the > ability to give network interfaces meaningful names... Even that isn't all that useful for me. For my servers I know exactly which interface is which (turns out that when Dell give you 4 on-board nics they always come up in the same order. Pretty useful.) We do the proper thing and document every bit of hardware in a central repo (ocsng makes this automagic) and the way it is when the box is racked is the way it stays till it's switched off 5 years later. Aside from disks and RAM I've only had 2 hardware failures in 4 years (both were Adaptec RAID cards) so changing hardware is an unusual event (and rather major at that when it does happen). For me, udev is more of a hindrance in the data centre than a help. I simply do not need it at all, so mdev interests me a lot. On my notebooks and test/development VMs, that's different. Those need udev. On something as complex as a node manager, I do not believe there is such a thing as one-size fits all or a universal design. -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
