On 06/26/2015 11:14 AM, Marco d'Itri wrote: >>> I believe that firmware-based device names work well enough in practice >>> since RHEL 7 uses them by default: I tend to trust a market-based >>> approach to maintenability more than anecdote from a very selected >>> population like the debian-devel@ subscribers. >> Oh, how nice is that... So our opinions don't count, and Red Hat is just >> always right! > Opinions do not make a statistic, indeed.
I'm sure you will agree that (computer) science is *not* about statistics anyway. I also tend to feel uncomfortable when I read "market-based" next to "[technical] approach", it's too marketing-ish, and I like to think that marketing isn't what influences Debian's technical decision (let's hope I'm not wrong here...). > And you have not been paying attention, because right here I have > expressed many times disagreement with some Red Hat decisions. Well, we don't have to follow all of what they do! >> All from redhat. /me not surprised... > Yes, at this point it is not a surprise that they produce good > documentation and we do not. I was trying to make the point that all of this ifname renaming cruft comes from Red Hat, and from systemd guys. Do we *have* to do it, just because they do? I'm really not convinced, as I saw how much trouble it can bring. For a single desktop machine, it's manageable. For a large cloud deployment with (very) heterogeneous hardware and multiple ifaces on each node, it can be hell to get the deployment right. >> So your proposal is: if the default is unusable (like above), then the >> poor user has to find a way to fix that... I'm not convince that this is >> what we want. I'd very much prefer a usable default. > Me too, but there is none that we can use. Sure there is: keep the good old ethX naming, which has always worked for many, many years. Now, expecting someone will raise the fact that sometimes, we get a different order of the ifaces. Well, there's many ways around that, the persistent naming file is one solution (which I don't like, as I think it shouldn't be written by default, it should be the user's decision to write it if he wants to, but hey, let's not discuss that...). Cheers, Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5591aab8.6070...@debian.org
