![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/4ea21ef367bb5b0c7deff1e77d3e1fa2.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On Sunday 01 December 2002 16:59, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 01 December 2002 20.42, Kevin McLauchlan wrote:
use ide-scsi so that sr0 or sda or so is needed?) linux:~ # (well, no it isn't, because none of those special devices exist)
What do you mean by that? You mean you have no file called /dev/sr0???
Sorry. They're all there when I do a "locate", or just ls the /dev directory. But immediately after mount suggested that might be the problem, I tried mounting each, and got told that each device did not exist.
Note that there was a little "buglet" in 8.1, in that for the first time ever, ide-cd was compiled as a module. This means that if you have one ide-scsi device on your system (a cd burner, in other words), all your cd devices will be ide-scsi unless you do something about it.
The easiest way to "do something about it" is to edit /etc/sysconfig/kernel and add "ide-cd" to the initrd variable in that file *before* the ide-scsi module, run mk_initrd (and lilo, if you're running lilo. If you're running grub you don't have to do anything other than mk_initrd) and reboot.
This is assuming you don't want your regular non-burner cd/dvd as ide-scsi. If you do, then the symlinking the others have talked about should set things straight.
Hmm... didn't want to quote so much, but I don't see a good place to snip. This falls into the "just enough knowledge to get into trouble" category. So, um... what is the significance? Why would I want to make one choice or the other? What grave consequences wil befall if I opt in one direction, and what grand vistas of convenience and opportunity will open up, if opt for the other way? Why would it matter that one device is ide-scsi if the other is, as well? Conflict? Convenience? Is there an overhead/speed penalty for the conversion/pretense? Does it screw up something, way "over on the other side of Linux" that I wouldn't have even thought was connected? Cheers, /kevin