On 12/10/2015 05:33 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 12/10/2015 1:56 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
As a lesser example, I just*adore* the new ethernet names - NOT. Breaks
scripts, makes it all more difficult, not to mention*so* much easier to
guess, when you've debugging a box and your organization has hardware from
many OEMs. What was wrong with eth0, or even em1?
when you have multiple adapters, perhaps different types (maybe 2 10gigE
and 2 1gigE?) which one is eth0 supposed to be? BSD has always used
driver type in the network device names, and having dealt with device
confusions before, I understand why.
ethtool can easily tell you the capabilities of the device - you don't need
magic names.
--
Stephen Clark
*NetWolves Managed Services, LLC.*
Director of Technology
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: steve.cl...@netwolves.com
http://www.netwolves.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
