On 20/12/2016 19:50, Heiko Baums wrote: > Am 20.12.2016 um 18:38 schrieb Kai Peter: >> Maybe there are different opinions, but what is cryptic on - as a >> typical one - enp3s0?: >> e - ethernet >> n - network >> p - pci (port) ... >> 3 - ... 3 >> s - slot ... >> 0 - ... 0 > > Think about that yourself again and compare it to - eth0: > > eth - ethernet > 0 - 1st card
No. This is incorrect. eth0 is the first card found by software, and not always the one you think it is. Off the top of my head, a few examples of how this can be a problem: - pull and reseat nic cards in a server, junior flunky who does it forgets which card went where and puts them back in the wrong slots - an update to PCI code does discovery ever so sightly differently - plug in a USB wireless or wired nic, can you absolutely *guarantee* that any kernel will *always* find a PCI nic before a USB one? - virtualized servers, where I can (and very much do) add, remove and edit virtual nics all the time. Now which one is the first? So yes, eth0 is far easier for humans to remember, it's also a fragile solution. On a desktop with only one nic all the above problems never happen. But Linux desktops and single-nic servers are not the target market for Linux, and hasn't been for a very long time. The real target is virtual machines, big iron, and embedded devices plus Android. Oddly enough, my 200+ FreeBSD machines all tend to use a naming convention like enp3s0? for nics and disks. Doesn't cause any issues in that world. In all these threads you participate in recently, I'm not seeing any actual real facts from you, or specifics. All I see is you howling (louder than Poetering!) on the other end of an email address about how you don't like changes that are happening. Actually, I think you don't have much clue about the real world and what it takes to run real fleets of machines. So my advice to you is to put up, or shut up. > > I don't think I need to explain which of both is a lot more complicated > and cryptic. > >> Just an example. The real mess with systemd is that it violates the good >> ol' Unix culture. Especially by "capturing" udev. Thanks to Gentoo for >> eudev!!! > > That's also true but not the only problem with systemd. > > Heiko Baums > -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
