On 29/01/13 05:32, Lennart Poettering wrote: > We figured in this it's better to just stick to a single name for each > iface, pick a good default scheme for it, and support alternative > schemes. The whole point of biosdevname was to move from a ennumeration-centric view or a bus-centric view of network interfaces to a user-centric view -- where possible the interface name matched the name stamped on the chassis. Many rackable systems have two or four ethernet interfaces in essentially random order on the chassis, so moving away from the bus-centric names to the user-visible names was a win. I don't understand why, having learned this lesson, we are moving from ennumeration-centric names to bus-centric names, even where the system itself has told us what the interface name actually is. -- Glen Turner www.gdt.id.au/~gdt -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
