Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Alan McKinnon]

On 31/03/2013 20:26, Dale wrote:
> Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg) wrote:
>> On 2013-03-31, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote:
>>> Pandu Poluan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Since it's obvious that upsteam has this "my way or the highway"
>>>> mentality, I'm curious about whether eudev (and mdev) exhibits the
>>>> same behavior...
>>>>
>>> I synced yesterday and I didn't see the news alert.   Last eudev update
>>> was in Feb. so I *guess* not.  It seems to be a "udev" thing.  That is
>>> why I mentioned eudev to someone else that was having this issue with a
>>> server setup.
>> I'd guess eudev will eventually do the same, although I hope that, it
>> being a separate codebase, makes it easier to adopt some solution like
>> the old rule generator, instead of using udev's approach.
>>
>> The udev upstream may have its issues, but there's actually a point in
>> removing this, the approach there was so far was just a dirty hack.
>>
>
>
> Thing is, it works for me.  The old udev worked,

It's more accurate to say it worked by accident rather than by design.
(Sort of like how the power utility gets power to your house - if yours
is anything like mine I get power despite their best efforts to not give
me any ...)

Anyway, the old method sucked and it sort of works for you and I because
we don't add anything ourselves that trip it up. But this new method...
geez lads, I just dunno.

How do Windows, Mac and Android deal with this stuff? They don't seem to
have any device naming problems, so what is the magic solution in use on
those platforms?


 eudev works but I'm not
> sure what hoops I would have to go through to get the new udev working,
> most likely the same ones others here are going through now.  For once,
> I'm not having to deal with some broken issue.  < knock on wood >
>
> My current uptime is about 190 days.  May hit it still but I'm certainly
> hoping I don't.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com