From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 22:13:50 +0200 > But I mildly disagree with the notion that the kernel can't start off > with more qualification of the names than merely ensuring their > uniqueness. Or the other way around: Even an entirely meaningless > prefix would be better than "eth..", or no prefix if that's possible, > because eth suspiciously sounds like Ethernet with which the misnamed > RFC 2734 driver eth1394 has very little to do. Even the driver source file is named "ethXXX"! All of the macros in the driver are named ETH*. The eth1394hdr looks eerily similar to a real ethernet header except that it lacks a source MAC address. It's addressing information plus a 16-bit (wow, why that size huh?) protocol field. A lot like ethernet. At the very least, it's related and similar. So there is really nothing inappropriate about eth* naming. > However, how mild my disagreement is should be apparent from the fact > that I didn't bother to suggest changing it before now, in 2009. :-) You have more to lose by changing this now (breaking existing systems, and yes I did see the hack workaround you posted) instead of fixing userspace to make whatever indications you deem appropriate. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
