On Monday 18 February 2008, Ian McDonald wrote: > One more good reason for persistent names. I'm not (and never have been) against persistent device naming. I see the need for it. I just feel that the currently available options are ugly and that they don't solve the whole problem. This makes me personally not very motivated to implement something in the installer that's based on those current options.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.