From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: random832@fastmail.com (Random832)
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 11:32:22 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] Mach for i386 / Mt Xinu or other
In-Reply-To: <58ac5a3a.geKODIzKbcVWDsIS%schily@schily.net>
References: <CAH1jEzYFv6bfN9i8qSSpy4dJhGg-WbZsyvVwxXro4dd4_RgCgw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMYpm851jyAUG271r4431fv8pvPhqB2ufM9OafAUzwpx+kVSEg@mail.gmail.com>
 <635c06b4-0048-4951-95ca-283c64c30fed@SG2APC01FT017.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com>
 <CAC20D2NStqm47mfSFUvtVaLZfB-cdWUfc7r4RoZBWUp4fTmaOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJfiPzz3Wvvgye0rRjZG4HAGWLU3ZtpGnii3KOBzOWkV4r5zvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1ba0f584-6478-4332-bcae-63ac6cedf2f6@SG2APC01FT041.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com>
 <alpine.BSF.2.02.1702190200300.94021@frieza.hoshinet.org>
 <F28F6A9F-F0C3-43AE-A1A6-1335998AAE38@superglobalmegacorp.com>
 <20170219154432.GA19243@mcvoy.com>
 <58ab3214.+jRaJEWVki5gYHFz%schily@schily.net>
 <20170220222457.GB3163@mcvoy.com>
 <58ac16ca.V0zEZijwK0rh0Cyr%schily@schily.net>
 <1487684861.1580775.887937752.698B8B60@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <58ac5a3a.geKODIzKbcVWDsIS%schily@schily.net>
Message-ID: <1487694742.1619299.888147784.303CBC43@webmail.messagingengine.com>

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017, at 10:18, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > So does requiring SCSI bus numbers rather than device filenames.
> 
> SCSI bus numbers are part of the SCSI CAM Standard for SCSI addressing,
> you
> are badly informed a second time.

Why does that make them more useful for end users than device filenames,
especially for non-SCSI devices? USB or ATA bus numbers - or USB device
identifiers - might be more useful than SCSI bus numbers, for end users
who have USB or ATA devices. ATA bus numbers had a deterministic mapping
to /dev/hd* device filenames, once upon a time.

Why does that mean the correct solution is "require the user to type in
the bus number on a program's command line" rather than "configure a
particular bus number to have a particular filename"?