On 07/01/13 07:18, Dave Reisner wrote: > On Sun, Jan 06, 2013 at 09:32:41PM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote: >> On Jan 6, 2013 7:38 PM, "Dave Reisner" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Just an FYI: >>> >>> Upstream pushed a commit[0] which gives network devices persistent, and >>> unique, names based on hardware attributes, avoiding the random kernel >>> names. While this solves a real problem, it's also a fairly jarring >>> change. For example: >>> >>> $ udevadm info /sys/class/net/eth0 >>> P: /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1c.2/0000:05:00.0/net/eth0 >>> E: DEVPATH=/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1c.2/0000:05:00.0/net/eth0 >>> E: ID_BUS=pci >>> E: ID_MODEL_ID=0x4364 >>> E: ID_NET_NAME_MAC=enxbcaec50bfcc8 >>> E: ID_NET_NAME_PATH=enp5s0 >>> E: ID_OUI_FROM_DATABASE=ASUSTek COMPUTER INC. >>> E: ID_PCI_CLASS_FROM_DATABASE=Network controller >>> E: ID_PCI_SUBCLASS_FROM_DATABASE=Ethernet controller >>> E: ID_PRODUCT_FROM_DATABASE=88E8056 PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet Controller >>> E: ID_VENDOR_FROM_DATABASE=Marvell Technology Group Ltd. >>> E: ID_VENDOR_ID=0x11ab >>> E: IFINDEX=2 >>> E: INTERFACE=eth0 >>> E: SUBSYSTEM=net >>> E: SYSTEMD_ALIAS=/sys/subsystem/net/devices/eth0 >>> E: TAGS=:systemd: >>> E: USEC_INITIALIZED=42063 >>> >>> If I were to reboot right now (systemd-git), eth0 would become enp5s0. I >>> tend to think that this is fairly extreme, and would throw off a lot of >>> people -- especially those who never needed to deal with interface >>> renaming. >>> >>> For systemd 197, I plan on shipping this rule as documentation in >>> /usr/share/doc/systemd and _not_ enabling it by default. Those who want >>> to opt in can simply copy the rule to /etc/udev/rules.d. They can also, >>> of course, continue to use whatever MAC-based rules they might have, but >>> I would strongly recommend switching these rules to be triggered by >>> ID_NET_NAME_{SLOT,PATH,ONBOARD} instead. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Dave >>> >>> [0] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/commit/?id=394e2938ff9 >> >> How about: >> >> 1) follow upstream on fresh installs (i.e. ship the rule and don't mask it >> in post_instal). > > Scary. I agree with upstream that this is wanted and that it solves real > problems, but I really see no reason that this should be opt-out, rather > than opt-in. We have the option of explaining why the dummy file exists > in /etc when we make things opt-in, but opt-out on install makes the > messaging easier to miss. Additionally, there'll be an awkward phase > where older install media uses older systemd (providing the "classic" > names), followed by a reboot into newer systemd with the new naming > scheme. > > Anyone else have an opinion on this?
Upstream decision... vanilla packages should follow it. >> 2) stay backwards compatible on upgrade (i.e. mask the rule in >> post_upgrade). >> >> 3) print a notice about the masking so people can unmask it. > > Definitely planned. > >> 4) rather than a symlink to null, use an empty rules file with a comment >> explaining why it is there and what will happen if you delete it. > > I like this. Done for the -git package, at least. > > d > >
