On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:32:31PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > One problem with biosdevname is that it uses different naming schemes in > the same namespace. For us, predictability means that by looking at the > lspci or DMI information of your card you can deterministically figure > out how your network interface is going to be named, but also the > reverse, that by looking at an interface name you can figure out where > precisely the data came from. With biosdevname' scheme you cannot do > that as using different enumeration within the same namespace might > result in name clashes, and hence we think it's a good idea to stay away > from the old namespace. This has a flipside: devices are likely to have similar names regardless of hardware details. This makes it easier to manage heterogeneous (i.e., real world) datacenters. That's not a primary use case for Fedora, but it sure is for our downstream distributions. -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
