On Sun, 27 Aug 2017 at 19:23:11 -0400
Hendrik Boom <hendrik@???> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 12:05:56AM +0200, Alessandro Selli wrote:
>>
>> This idea does has some merit, but it cannot always prevent the
>> necessity to reconfigure a system's networking due to a hardware change
>> and to a sysadmin's specific needs; sometimes a cars with NIC
>> 0b:45:81:f4:3e:01 is to be en1, sometimes a never-before-seen card needs
>> to be given the same name. How is the system supposed to know? It
>> cannot, the sysadmin will still need to adjust thing by hand according to
>> what it's needed in the specific circumstances. I'd like a system that
>> was as simple as possible to configure and maintain that made this
>> renaming as straightforward as possible, not as complicated ad udev rules
>> are.
>
> Do I understand you ccorrectly: that the udev rules are flexible
> enough to do the right thing, but they are too hard to use?

Yes. On some occations I had to find out where in /sys a device had it's
control and attribute directory (not easy at all to a newbie) and then run a
command such as:

# udevadm info --attribute-walk /sys/devices/pci0000\:00/0000\:00\:1a.0/usb1/

to get a long list of attributes to select from when building my own rule
that isolated a single device. And I remember in a few occasions my old rules
stopped working and I had to redo them to reflect a change in rules syntax
that was introduced from a udev's version onwards. And I could not have udev
run a command at device hot-plug. Too cumbersome and little intuitive. And
not well documented, at least at the time (a few years ago).


Alessandro