On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:46:29PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Miloslav Trmač (mitr(a)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: zdzichubg(a)chrome.pl -- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen