[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposal: enable stateless persistant network interface names

On Jun 26, Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote:

> > Actually it requires us to keep maintaining the 
> > Revert-udev-network-device-renaming patch as long as there will be 
> > systems with a 70-persistent-net.rules file renaming eth* to eth*.
> The other solution would be to upstream that patch (maybe as a kernel
> option if that is relevant).
This cannot happen since the patch actually reverts an upstream change.

> > I believe that firmware-based device names work well enough in practice 
> > since RHEL 7 uses them by default: I tend to trust a market-based 
> > approach to maintenability more than anecdote from a very selected 
> > population like the debian-devel@ subscribers.
> Oh, how nice is that... So our opinions don't count, and Red Hat is just
> always right!
Opinions do not make a statistic, indeed.
And you have not been paying attention, because right here I have 
expressed many times disagreement with some Red Hat decisions.

> All from redhat. /me not surprised...
Yes, at this point it is not a surprise that they produce good 
documentation and we do not.

> So your proposal is: if the default is unusable (like above), then the
> poor user has to find a way to fix that... I'm not convince that this is
> what we want. I'd very much prefer a usable default.
Me too, but there is none that we can use.


Attachment: pgp1DOp_bHMrR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: