Am 18.02.2015 um 21:58 schrieb Giancarlo Razzolini:
On 18-02-2015 18:49, Reindl Harald wrote:that won't change the fact that if *anybody* comes to the idea to take an interface which *is up* down for rename it should get removed any commit permissions instantaneously because he don't care about *a ton* of implications depending on the local environment doing soFirst of all, I'm not a systemd dev. Nor want to be. Secondly, I believe you didn't really understood my proposition. You are talking about userspace *after* initramfs and *after* systemd is initialized and renamed (or not) any interface. Of course systemd should *never* mess with an interface *after* system initialization. But it can do anything *right after* the initramfs hand the control to systemd. Of course except if the interface is up for a nfsroot. In this case the renaming shouldn't happen. But this is an exception
and since you say *this* is an exception you can be sure that you could find enough people point to this and that which explains why it is a bad idea - implement something which changes existing behavior and needs exceptions right from the start is doomed to fail in the long run
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
