[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3bb2a438-fe86-57f6-5374-420e574bf147@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:36:00 +0100
From: poma <pomidorabelisima@...il.com>
To: systemd Mailing List <systemd-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Community support for Fedora users
<users@...ts.fedoraproject.org>,
Tom Horsley <horsley1953@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [...] "How does the new naming scheme look like, precisely?"
On 14.03.2017 17:16, Tom Horsley wrote:
> And the consistent names change every single time some
> developer decides he just has to rewrite the algorithm
> to make it better, or systemd decides to engluph yet
> another component and not be backward compatible, or
> a kernel developer gets a new motherboard where the
> scheme doesn't work and his fix has the side effect
> of changing the names on thousands of existing systems, etc.
>
> There have been at least 3 different "immutable" name
> schemes in the short time the whole concept has existed.
>
> I finally decided to eradicate it and go back to eth0
> and friends because it was infinitely more reliable than
> having to discover yet another naming scheme in every damn
> release.
>
> Now my only problem will be that they'll probably keep changing
> the name of the kernel option to disable it :-).
>
This sounds quite disturbing,
can someone from the systemd and kernel campus comment here,
as Tom claims, whether these are the facts?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists