:: Re: [DNG] Purpose of an OS: was net…
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Didier Kryn
Date:  
To: dng
Subject: Re: [DNG] Purpose of an OS: was network device naming
Le 03/10/2015 09:49, Simon Hobson a écrit :
> Lets face it - there is no "right" answer to this other than a system with enough intelligence to read the user/admin's mind and work out what they intend to happen - and I think we're a bit off that yet !
> Looking back, I think I've "moved" something at least as often as I've replaced it with a different something in the same location - probably more in fact.
>
>


     This is exactly the point. But let's consider which devices are a 
concern.


     As was remarked already, disks are no longer a problem since 
partitions are uniquely identified, so that nobody cares of a random 
device name. And even symlinks are created in /media, named after the 
labels of the partitions.


     I am not sure numbering wifi interfaces (who uses more than one?) 
is a problem; which matters is the station they connect to.


     Ethernet interfaces are maybe the only issue, which explains why 
distros have implemented a solution by the means of udev rules. The way 
it is implemented is secure: every new ethernet device is given a new 
device name (ethX) and no entry is created in /etc/network/interfaces; 
therefore the interface isn't connected without an action of the admin. 
If it is a replacement, then the admin should just edit the MAC address 
in /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules. Not a big deal, compared 
to replacing the hardware.


     The new policy Poettering et al are enforcing means to relieve the 
admin from this little and rare work, at the cost of a nightmare for all 
the rest.


     Didier