Alessandro Selli wrote:
>> 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 newb
On Sun, 27 Aug 2017 at 19:23:11 -0400
Hendrik Boom 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
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
Adam Borowski wrote:
> It would mean changes to every single program that deals with network
> interfaces. With renaming, you apply this in a single place.
This.
If an interface name changes, I don't want to have to find and change every
occurrence - network config, firewall/iptables rules, dh
El 26/08/17 a les 19:57, Didier Kryn ha escrit:
> Le 26/08/2017 à 19:02, Alessandro Selli a écrit :
> With my proposed solution, the admin has the choice to refer to nics
> by their interface name, as given by the kernel, which is fine when
> there is only one, or by their MAC address, if ther
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 13:11:36 -0400
Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 07:02:41PM +0200, Alessandro Selli wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 17:19:48 +0200
>> Didier Kryn wrote:
>>
>>> AFAIR I fully agreed on that and then it jumped into my face that
>>> the renaming wasn't n
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 19:57:34 +0200
Didier Kryn wrote:
> Le 26/08/2017 à 19:02, Alessandro Selli a écrit :
>> On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 17:19:48 +0200
>> Didier Kryn wrote:
>>
>>> AFAIR I fully agreed on that and then it jumped into my face that
>>> the renaming wasn't necessary at all, bec
I am grateful for this thread being on topic again.
Adam Borowski - 26.08.17, 20:54:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 05:19:48PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
> > AFAIR I fully agreed on that and then it jumped into my face that the
> > renaming wasn't necessary at all, because it is sufficient to know the M
On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 05:19:48PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
> AFAIR I fully agreed on that and then it jumped into my face that the
> renaming wasn't necessary at all, because it is sufficient to know the MAC
> address and ignore completely the interface name. It is just enough for this
> to w
Le 26/08/2017 à 19:02, Alessandro Selli a écrit :
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 17:19:48 +0200
Didier Kryn wrote:
AFAIR I fully agreed on that and then it jumped into my face that
the renaming wasn't necessary at all, because it is sufficient to know
the MAC address and ignore completely the in
On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 07:02:41PM +0200, Alessandro Selli wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 17:19:48 +0200
> Didier Kryn wrote:
>
> > AFAIR I fully agreed on that and then it jumped into my face that
> > the renaming wasn't necessary at all, because it is sufficient to know
> > the MAC addr
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 17:19:48 +0200
Didier Kryn wrote:
> AFAIR I fully agreed on that and then it jumped into my face that
> the renaming wasn't necessary at all, because it is sufficient to know
> the MAC address and ignore completely the interface name. It is just
> enough for this to
Le 26/08/2017 à 16:35, Alessandro Selli a écrit :
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 15:04:51 +0200
Didier Kryn wrote:
Le 26/08/2017 à 14:14, Alessandro Selli a écrit :
My main subject was questionning the necessity of renaming network
interfaces (with my answer to the question). Since nobody argu
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 15:04:51 +0200
Didier Kryn wrote:
> Le 26/08/2017 à 14:14, Alessandro Selli a écrit :
>>> My main subject was questionning the necessity of renaming network
>>> interfaces (with my answer to the question). Since nobody argumented
>>> that renaming was necessary, it is
Le 26/08/2017 à 14:14, Alessandro Selli a écrit :
My main subject was questionning the necessity of renaming network
interfaces (with my answer to the question). Since nobody argumented
that renaming was necessary, it is clear for me that renaming is a
feature invented to give more importan
On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 at 15:13:40 +0200
Didier Kryn wrote:
[...]
> My main subject was questionning the necessity of renaming network
> interfaces (with my answer to the question). Since nobody argumented
> that renaming was necessary, it is clear for me that renaming is a
> feature invent
Le 24/08/2017 à 01:01, John Franklin a écrit :
On Aug 22, 2017, at 2:26 PM, Dave
Turner wrote:
There's a lot of heavy discussion going on in
'Proposed change to ascii' and 'an alternative to renaming'
But what does Linus do? How does he think this should play out?
I am a big fan of 'going w
> On Aug 22, 2017, at 2:26 PM, Dave Turner
> wrote:
>
> There's a lot of heavy discussion going on in
>
> 'Proposed change to ascii' and 'an alternative to renaming'
>
> But what does Linus do? How does he think this should play out?
>
> I am a big fan of 'going with the flow' apart from whe
There's a lot of heavy discussion going on in
'Proposed change to ascii' and 'an alternative to renaming'
But what does Linus do? How does he think this should play out?
I am a big fan of 'going with the flow' apart from when it is a really
bad idea such as systemd.
For the rest, I sold my c
19 matches
Mail list logo
