On 7/18/22 12:15, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
On 18.07.2022 08:57:21, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
What do the maintainers think of dropping the old "slcan" name, and
just allowing this to be a normal canX device? These patches do bring
it closer to that, after all. In this case, this name string magic
could be dropped altogether.
I'm fine with it in general. But we have to take into account that there
might be existing setups that still might use the slcan_attach or slcand
mechanic which will likely break after the kernel update.
But in the end the slcan0 shows up everywhere - even in log files, etc.
So we really should name it canX. When people really get in trouble with it,
they can rename the network interface name with the 'ip' tool ...
Don't break user space! If you don't like slcanX use udev to give it a
proper name.
Ok. Fine with me too.
IMO it does not break user space when slcan gets the common naming
schema for CAN interface names.
We had the same thing with 'eth0' which is now named enblablabla or
'wlan0' now named wlp2s0.
But I have no strong opinion on that naming ...
Best regards,
Oliver
