On 06.09.17 23:31, Andrew Pam via luv-main wrote:
> On 06/09/17 19:20, Erik Christiansen via luv-main wrote:
> > OK, I could buy that for a hotplug dongle, but enp5s0 looks awfully
> > short for a MAC? (Mine came out as enp2s0, before I gave it the flick.)
>
> <https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/>
>
> Hope that helps.
Thanks Andrew.
It seems mendacious to pretend that a writable root fs is required for
stable ethx naming, when in reality, reading /etc/iftab suffices. When
systemdix is able to write its /dev/urandom crap, it would be equally
capable of writing useful names instead, if it were not a Poetterwank.
If the implementation would be streamlined by writing temporary bumpf,
then it is not beyond the power of a competent programmer to rectify
naming stepwise as the system comes up.
Paragraph 4 admits as much, recognising that others have respect for
users, and provide usability which systemdix willfully avoids. It
describes the superior alternative, maintaining traditional naming
behaviour and NIC management effort. It confirms that systemdix is not
linux.
Paragraph 5 loses the plot again, though, by willfully choosing
obfuscating perversity. If enp5s0 hoo-ha can be provided, then so can
eth0.
No, I'm not going in to muck with their code, as they'd just find other
ways to pervert good design, making my effort as big a waste as theirs.
It is sufficient for me to move out of reach of systemdix.
Erik
--
(5) It is always possible to agglutinate multiple separate problems
into a single complex interdependent solution. In most cases
this is a bad idea.
RFC-1925
_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.luv.asn.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luv-main
