On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:55:11PM +0100, James Youngman wrote: > > So what did you use instead? I have never had trouble with using > > "eth0" or "/dev/eth0" before, so I didn't check if such a file > > existed. A network interface is a device which I expect to be > > represented under /dev. > > Not so, at least on Linux.
Well, all devices are supposed to be available under /dev. > Network interfaces are not represented as > any kind of file (and specifically not as device special files) on > Linux. Why not? Afair they used to be --- and even if not, I'd expect them to be represented under /dev because all devices are supposed to be represented there. > For example, you cannot use open(2) or rename(2) on eth0. It wouldn't make much sense if you could, would it? > I've heard (mostly long ago, certainly before 1996) about Linux-based > systems where interfaces also have nodes under /dev, but I've never > heard of one where this is necessary. Afair I started using Linux before 1996. Somehow, I expect /dev/eth0 to be there as a matter of course. That's probably where it was last time I looked. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org