https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267766
Oleksandr Kryvulia changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||shur...@shurik.kiev.ua
--- Co
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267766
--- Comment #4 from Pat Maddox ---
(In reply to Zhenlei Huang from comment #3)
What do you have in mind by `basename newname`? Can you give an example
invocation and what it would produce?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267766
--- Comment #3 from Zhenlei Huang ---
(In reply to Pat Maddox from comment #2)
Maybe `ifconfig epair create basename newname` is better for epair(4) .
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267766
--- Comment #2 from Pat Maddox ---
I think it makes sense to retain the a/b convention, so that `ifconfig epair
create name newname` would produce newnamea and newnameb.
Or perhaps you pass both names e.g. `ifconfig epair create name newna
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267766
--- Comment #1 from Zhenlei Huang ---
(In reply to Olivier Cochard from comment #0)
I thinks it works as intended.
For epair(4), rename on create seems not useful compared with other cloning
interfaces.
As on create always a pair of inter
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267766
Bug ID: 267766
Summary: epair naming during creation time only rename the
first interface
Product: Base System
Version: CURRENT
Hardware: Any
OS: Any
