| 1 |
On 29/03/2013 11:50, Samuli Suominen wrote: |
| 2 |
> Not false, but configurable, and linked from the news item -- nobody |
| 3 |
> stopping you from eg. using MAC addresses instead of PCI slots for |
| 4 |
> defining the names, just like one would have renamed them using MAC with |
| 5 |
> 70-persistent-net.rules |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Which I usually do. But |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
"With the new predictable ... scheme ... the names will be static and |
| 10 |
not randomly rename ..." |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
is false. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
The name will be predictable before rebooting (maybe?) but it could very |
| 15 |
easily change randomly on udev update. |
| 16 |
> Not FUD, but a fact, depends on the driver code (in kernel) if it'll |
| 17 |
> change or not |
| 18 |
> That's random enough as we can't force people to track kernel source |
| 19 |
> tree and drivers code |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Hm hm. It's still FUD. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
If my desktop only has one Ethernet interface, no matter how many kernel |
| 24 |
changes happen, it'll always be eth0. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Whereas, with the new predictable scheme, if I move that card around, it |
| 27 |
will change name. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Tell me which one is random, again? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
--- |
| 32 |
I'm not saying you shouldn't enable it (feel free to screw up user as |
| 33 |
much as you want, just don't complain if they don't like you), but since |
| 34 |
both kernel naming and predictable naming have their chance to change, |
| 35 |
don't spread FUD. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes |
| 39 |
flameeyes@×××××××××.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ |
Archives