which seems to provide the needed information about the implementation.
Another decision that needs to be made is how to name the devices. It seems we
could:
- Allocate the usual numbered names (e.g., dsp, dsp1, dsp2), but ensure that
they are persistent even when devices are added or removed. For example, if a
system has dsp and dsp1, and the device corresponding to dsp is removed, only
dsp1 would remain. If a new device were added, it would become dsp2. This is
confusing, but consistent
- Some variant of the above which ensures that there is always _something_ at
the default device location (e.g., /dev/dsp), but retains some consistency
- Allocate the names according to some other scheme (such as?)
Marco d'Itri pointed out this guide on IRC:
http:// www.reactivated .net/udevrules. php
which seems to provide the needed information about the implementation.
Another decision that needs to be made is how to name the devices. It seems we
could:
- Allocate the usual numbered names (e.g., dsp, dsp1, dsp2), but ensure that
they are persistent even when devices are added or removed. For example, if a
system has dsp and dsp1, and the device corresponding to dsp is removed, only
dsp1 would remain. If a new device were added, it would become dsp2. This is
confusing, but consistent
- Some variant of the above which ensures that there is always _something_ at
the default device location (e.g., /dev/dsp), but retains some consistency
- Allocate the names according to some other scheme (such as?)