|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Forums | Portal | Register | Rules & FAQ | Contribute | Members List | Arcade | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users Advanced UNIX and Linux questions go here. Expert-to-Expert. |
More UNIX and Linux Forum Topics You Might Find Helpful
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| E2900 controller naming | ppass | SUN Solaris | 3 | 06-05-2008 04:45 PM |
| naming a file to hostname | deaconf19 | Shell Programming and Scripting | 4 | 11-19-2007 07:54 PM |
| Naming convention for Libraries.. | rkshukla14 | UNIX Desktop for Dummies Questions & Answers | 0 | 02-09-2007 04:31 AM |
| Naming a socket | geester | High Level Programming | 5 | 11-20-2006 08:16 AM |
| How to discover what naming services are available | test111111 | Linux | 0 | 10-08-2004 07:34 AM |
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
01-18-2003
|
|||
|
|||
|
Controller Naming
Hello all,
How does the Solaris identifies the controller subscript ? ( like c0txdxs0 or c1txdxsx ?? ) I have a unix box ( Ultra 30) running with 2.5.1. When I connected an external hard disk to the on-board scsi port, it got identified as c0t1dxsx... ( /devices/pci@1f,4000/scsi@3/sd@1 ) But when I connected a dot hill raid box to the same port, it got identified as c1t1dxsx ( /devices/pci@1f,4000/scsi@3,1/sd@1 ) The raid box has an in built controller. Its quite logical to think that this could be due to that built-in controller of the raid-box. ( Am i correct ? ) I hope somebody can throw more information on this topic Thanks in advance... |
| Forum Sponsor | ||
|
|
|
01-22-2003
|
||||
|
||||
|
See HOW PERIPHERAL DEVICES ARE LOCATED.
(and yes, since there is a controller in the raid box, it's seen as the second (number start at 0) controller giving it a number 1. |
||||
| Google UNIX.COM |
Simon Champion!
Linear Mode
