| 1 |
On 2016-12-20 17:21, Heiko Baums wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 20.12.2016 um 05:23 schrieb Andrej Rode: |
| 3 |
>> Yeah they make life easier. From your talk you never had a problem |
| 4 |
>> with |
| 5 |
>> eth<0,10> switching names after boot. Everyone who had them |
| 6 |
>> appreciates |
| 7 |
>> predictable network interfaces. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Everyone who had them could learn how to write simple udev rules to get |
| 10 |
> fixed eth<0,10> names after every boot. No systemd and no "predictable" |
| 11 |
> names necessary. |
| 12 |
right |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Nevertheless I'm still wondering what's so predictable at those |
| 15 |
> incomprehensible, cryptic device names anyway. And I don't want to know |
| 16 |
> that. |
| 17 |
Maybe there are different opinions, but what is cryptic on - as a |
| 18 |
typical one - enp3s0?: |
| 19 |
e - ethernet |
| 20 |
n - network |
| 21 |
p - pci (port) ... |
| 22 |
3 - ... 3 |
| 23 |
s - slot ... |
| 24 |
0 - ... 0 |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Just an example. The real mess with systemd is that it violates the good |
| 27 |
ol' Unix culture. Especially by "capturing" udev. Thanks to Gentoo for |
| 28 |
eudev!!! |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Heiko Baums |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Sent with eQmail-1.10-dev |
Archives