Am Freitag, 22. März 2019, 17:15:29 CET schrieb Reco: > Hi. Hi Reco, > > No, this is done by udev. It can be disabled, it can be configured, and > it can be left as is. > I know, that the old style can be kept by either using udev (withg persistent- net.rules for example) or by a kernel parm (something like "ifnet.rename=0, or similar, forgot the correct syntax)
> > However, I discovered many packages, where are still the old names > > preconfigured with the old names. > > Some examples are in order. > I had to correct /etc/network/interfaces, kismet, wicd-*, powertweak, snort and some others. No big deal. > > Most of the server-side packages that I can think of are either bind to all > available interfaces by default, or bind to lo, which is still here. There were more the desktop users with laptops in my mind. > > > I know, the last one might be problematic, because the developer never can > > know, whhich interface is used (eth0? eth1? wlan0? whatever) > > Or, for instance, en0p2gibberish. They call them Unpredictable Device > Named for a reason. > Yes, thsis is another thing, which I am thinking of: The names could change (in case, when there are more than one network devices are active or the order of activing changed). In the past, I forced the order with persistent- net.rules. Dunno, if normal users can deal with it. Can it your Mom or your Dad? Grandpa? Grandma? > > For myself I got the solution: just edited all configs to the new names, > > but I believe, for unexperienced users, this could be problematic. > > So-called "unexperienced" users should not meddle in servers' > configuration in the first place. > And NIC configuration is hardly relevant for a typical desktop. > > > And I also believe, an unexperienced user gets in trouble, when nobody > > points him, where to look. > > I don't know about that. I mean, you wrote here, isn't it? Nobody's > stopping this hypothetical "unexperienced" users to do the same. Remember, this list is in English, not all people do speak English well (included myself), and I doubt, most people want to spare the time, to crawl through all the lists. They want it just work. > > > You do not need to look for a solution for me, I just wanted to remember > > this thing and hope, we should keep this little problem in mind. Maybe > > this is worth a discussion, if not, please excuse the noise. > > That's OK. It's Friday and it's been an eventful week, so a list can use > a flamewar. > No, a flamewar will be funny for some people, but IMO it has got not much worth. For myself, I can only tell: Upredictable Device Name is nice, but only a good idea for specialists. But this is my opinion, and no one is forced, to take it over. Happy hacking and a nice weekend! > Reco Best Hans
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
