On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 12:42:54 -0500, John Goerzen wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 07:35:39PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > On Mar 26, John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I think that the right thing to do is to assign the persistent names to > > > network devices that still exist in the system, but to do nothing with > > > any other network devices. That will allow systems to still boot and > > > come up properly in the face of network hardware changes. > > Think harder about it and you will understand why this cannot be tested > > in practice. > > Cannot be *tested*? > I think the problem is that you can't know in advance whether the device still exists or not, and whether it will be plugged in later (because everything runs asynchronously).
Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
