Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: lee <lee@××××××××.de>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:56:39
Message-Id: 87r353zmfs.fsf@heimdali.yagibdah.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No by Daniel Frey
1 Daniel Frey <djqfrey@×××××.com> writes:
2
3 > On 12/19/2016 10:15 AM, lee wrote:
4 >> "Walter Dnes" <waltdnes@××××××××.org> writes:
5 >>
6 >>> Similarly, the vast majority of home users have a machine with one
7 >>> ethernet port, and in the past it's always been eth0.
8 >>
9 >> Since 10 years or so, the default is two ports.
10 >
11 > Not in any of the computers I've built. Generally only high end or
12 > workstation/server boards have two ports.
13 >
14 > i.e. not what the typical home user would buy.
15
16 It is not reasonable to assume that a "typical home user" would want a
17 computer with a crappy board to run Linux on it (or for anything
18 else). If they are that cheap, they're better off buying a used one.
19 When they are sufficiently clueless to want something like that, what
20 does it matter what the network interfaces are called.
21
22 >>> Now the name varies in each machine depending on the motherboard
23 >>> layout; oogabooga11? foobar42? It may be static, but you don't know
24 >>> what it'll be, without first booting the machine. In a truly
25 >>> Orwellian twist, this "feature" is referred to as "Predictable"
26 >>> Network Interface Names. It only makes things easier for corporate
27 >>> machines acting as gateways/routers, with multiple ports. Again, the
28 >>> average home user is being jerked around for a corporate agenda.
29 >>
30 >> Perhaps the hidden agenda was to make the names indistinguishable and
31 >> unrecognisable, forcing everyone to use copy and paste --- after at
32 >> least double-checking which port is which --- to eliminate human and
33 >> typing errors in order to get more predictable results.
34 >>
35 >> Otherwise, how would using unrecognisable names for network ports make
36 >> anything easier for corporate machines?
37 >>
38 >
39 > It is even more frustrating that these so-called predictable network
40 > names actually can change on a reboot, it's happened to me more than
41 > once when multiple network cards are detected in a different order.
42
43 I haven't had that happen with the unrecognisable names. Aren't they
44 supposed to prevent things like that?

Replies