From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BDD113838B for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 03:27:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3624BE0B0A; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 03:27:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f182.google.com (mail-we0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E60B9E0AB6 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 03:27:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f182.google.com with SMTP id u57so7157368wes.27 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 20:27:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MiLgCQObBMyaK8Tv7imFz2xXogsTKhRAi/NNnqNcqP4=; b=iA2EkqDM92B48moCgumrFu13sPV5YYG4lHZ5/euRWDs1YEZ4eABt6v/+x+nhVL1NJE P4uw6z0E5RFrhHKF9LhYTDJYdP3w91wLF6B+I1vj2IbIPPiCnUaqB2GNSPPspehVEhiD 4n9rTbTQjj8Q1NCx+YkkUtcMNDOE1tzqNcf5G+W6abIfsKX5gD1FnV+f21Y/P4MTt1Rj oDrO+/Z329fGMdwUUQgbp2jWFeZ7E6kaCy6L2v0VYhpVuRNXQ27MrBycaDhsMQ/3vUXD livcpWUyc4kSR3Nf51p18apeOZitDR4hdbBHRWDExKFUwGdhO+IQhztHj0oiyEhSAErf C6Bw== X-Received: by 10.180.149.212 with SMTP id uc20mr17222845wib.10.1411702043650; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 20:27:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.40] ([41.85.145.17]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id om1sm4606673wjc.42.2014.09.25.20.27.22 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 25 Sep 2014 20:27:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5424DD13.3060208@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 05:27:15 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ? References: <54245C36.50507@gentoo.org> <20140926002320.GB21773@waltdnes.org> In-Reply-To: <20140926002320.GB21773@waltdnes.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 3ff2a50c-0a0a-45c3-93e9-9203d3da939e X-Archives-Hash: f6ffc1383db08bb0a96b289934b87704 On 26/09/2014 02:23, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 07:03:02PM +0000, James wrote >> Samuli Suominen gentoo.org> writes: >> >> >>>> Any other caveats (short term) on switching udev to eudev? >> >>> in fact, from what I last checked, eudev's networking is at same level >>> with udev-208, from time before the .link support at all >> >> ah, back when ethernet defaulted to eth0 not "enp5s0" ? > > I buy machines with one ethernet interface. What I find particularly > annoying is this doublespeak about calling it "predictable". Before the > change, it was predicatbly "eth0". Now, it's different on every > different model. > It's not doublespeak, the interfaces are named exactly according to where they are on the PCI bus. If you had two interfaces, they show up to the kernel in random order by time and sometimes eth0/eth1 are nto the same they were before the reboot. You are just looking at this from the wrong point of view. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com