On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:46:29PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) said: 
> > >> That's always the hope, and then we meet the cold reality, where someone
> > >> just patched 'em1' into everything and hoped that was good enough. But
> > >> sure, 'damn the torpedoes' is a viable approach too. I guess I was just
> > >> kind of hoping F19 would be a release without yet more churn in the core
> > >> system where we could try and stabilize things a bit.
> > >>
> > > I agree. The scope says no impact, but who knows how many packages depend 
> > > on
> > > hardcoded names.
> > 
> > It's not only "em1" mistakenly hard-coded in applications; it's user's
> > saved configuration, scripts etc., where often there is no practical
> > alternative to "hard-coding".
> 
> I would assume that it would only be for new installs, not for upgrades.

  Upgrades will retain biosdevname package, so names shouldn't change.
 
> It might be worth considering that we keep the one special case and
> change the 'eno' prefix in udev to 'em'... this will help some.

  This could be dangerous.  If I understand right, there is not guarantee
"em1" would become "eno1" in 100% of cases.  Iptables saved config would
still need to be checked and verified.

-- 
Tomasz Torcz                 Morality must always be based on practicality.
xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.pl                -- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to