> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:55:11PM +0100, James Youngman wrote: > > > So what did you use instead? I have never had trouble with using > > > "eth0" or "/dev/eth0" before, so I didn't check if such a file > > > existed. A network interface is a device which I expect to be > > > represented under /dev. > > > > Not so, at least on Linux.
On 03.06.09 10:51, lee wrote: > Well, all devices are supposed to be available under /dev. Who told you that? I have never heard of this and I work with linux since 1997... > > Network interfaces are not represented as > > any kind of file (and specifically not as device special files) on > > Linux. > > Why not? Afair they used to be --- and even if not, I'd expect them to > be represented under /dev because all devices are supposed to be > represented there. you expect wrong. Why should they be there? > > For example, you cannot use open(2) or rename(2) on eth0. > > It wouldn't make much sense if you could, would it? That's just it. There's no reason to work with them as with files, so there's no reason to have them on filesystem. > > I've heard (mostly long ago, certainly before 1996) about Linux-based > > systems where interfaces also have nodes under /dev, but I've never > > heard of one where this is necessary. > > Afair I started using Linux before 1996. Somehow, I expect /dev/eth0 > to be there as a matter of course. That's probably where it was last > time I looked. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
