Talk:Loop device

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I've merged Loopback mount to Loop device. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-25 10:04Z

I added a link to the IMDisk utility from LTR Data because the VMware version doesn't work on my w2k8 machines. Thalakan (talk) 20:10, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are several instances of use of the term "loopback device" to refer to a loop device (rather than a loopback interface), e.g., [1] [2] [3]. Actually, these are the first hits when searching for "loopback device" (apart from the Wikipedia entry itself). Tizio 14:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, loopback device does not belong here. The references you site are simply wrong and are not authoritative. The use of loopback device without qualification refers to loopback interface. The loopback interface has been around a lot longer than loop device. Linux is the only operating system that uses the term 'loop', as far as I know off hand, but it is 'loop' and not 'loopback'. When you read good documentation of the mount command, most people properly speak of 'loop mounting' and not 'loopback mounting'. Now, that said, the linux kernel source code does use the term 'loopback device' ONCE, but only ONCE in a comment, but not in code, where the device is named 'loop_*'. Other operating system, made the difference clear by naming the devices quite differently, namely vnd in BSD, lofi in SunOS. The loop device does not even have the characteristics of the feature of loopback, quite properly but not exhaustively described in loopback. Kbrose (talk) 12:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A term that is widely used (even if in the wrong sense) is still something to be mentioned: someone may look at that bad (IYO) documentation and come here looking for "loopback device". Finally, I do not see you provided any evidence so far of the use of "loopback device" to refer to a "loopback interface". Tizio 13:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The term is NOT widely used in the wrong way. And for evidence, the UNIX/LINUX kernel source code is the authoritative definition, not enough? in the kernel devices have names, hardcoded in the symbols of driver entry points, and the ONLY device that has the name 'loopback' is the network interface. No encyclopedia includes material that is factually wrong. there is now a note under see also, that it is a different concept, but could be expanded. Kbrose (talk) 13:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we do include include information that is factually wrong, saying that it is factually wrong (e.g., Cow tipping). As for the wide use, check Google and you'll see that many people are using "loopback device" for "loop device" [4]. In this particular case, you showed that "loopback" generally refers to "loopback interface", but you didn't provide any referece for "loopback device" as a synonym for "loopback interface". Tizio 14:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For many readers, the relevance of the word "loop" is less than obvious. Before "Uses of loop mounting" there can be a section "Terminology". There the various terms, ambiguities and corruptions can be explained. Regards, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 16:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas about the first use of this term? I'd guess that "loop" is from having a filesystem in a file in a filesystem. Likely the author who used it first offered a justification. We just need to find it. Regards, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 02:17, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some mention of speed in comparison to using a block device directly might be nice. For example, given a ext2 image on a hard drive, and a ext2 partition on the same hard drive, how much slower is using the loop device to access the image? -- Ralph Corderoy (talk) 17:31, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just learned that WP should give preference to "original work", but the Linux loop device is just a reimplementation of a 5 years older work, called "fbk" (file emulates block device). For this reason, I recommend a rename to "fbk (Unix)". Schily (talk) 20:52, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Loop device. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101230183509/http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2254/lofi-7d to http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2254/lofi-7d
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090502024151/http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2240/lofiadm-1m?a=view to http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2240/lofiadm-1m?a=view

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:13, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article mentions windows 7 gained it, I would be interested to know the various years from all the platforms. 73.35.136.136 (talk) 20:39, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]