Rainer Weikusat <rweiku...@talktalk.net> wrote: > In absences of post hoc driver shuffling, these names *are not* > random. But as that's clearly something you're not willing to believe > in, this discussion seems pretty pointless.
I think we must be making assumptions about what each other are talking about - you appear to be thinking I'm thinking something different to what I am. You've posted a statement that says drivers are loaded in a non-deterministic order. Therefore, in the general case where not all interfaces are using the same driver, in the absence of something to deal with it, the order the interfaces get their driver's loaded in not deterministic. Eg, if I had (say) an Intel and a Broadcom NIC - then according to what you wrote, it's indeterminate which driver will load first. Thus it's indeterminate whether the Intel or Broadcom NIC would get to be eth0. The same thing with multiple SCSI interfaces - something I have personally suffered from in the past. Now, if you are saying that absent udev randomising things, the kernel will always load things in the same order - well I'll buy that. But it might have helped if you'd said that as it wasn't obvious from anything you wrote. Otherwise, I'm missing something - but that wouldn't be the first time ! _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
