| To: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Device naming for wireless NICs... |
| From: | Tomasz Torcz <zdzichu@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:36:57 +0100 |
| In-reply-to: | <405093A7.90209@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20040304023524.GA19453@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040310165548.A24693@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040310172114.GA8867@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <404F5097.4040406@xxxxxxxxx> <20040310175200.GA9531@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <404F5744.1040201@xxxxxxxxx> <20040311024816.GC3738@xxxxxxxxx> <404FD6BC.7090409@xxxxxxxxx> <20040311031709.GC3782@xxxxxxxxx> <405093A7.90209@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 10:28:23AM -0600, James Ketrenos wrote: > I don't mind adding a module parameter to change the default name (if that > is the standard practice), but thought I'd see what others thing rather > than just going off and doing something random. This could be handled by nameif in userspace. > Is there a technical or ease of use reason switching away from ethX? My > thinking in keeping it eth was that it then represents a greater chance of > "just working" with most networking scripts and utilities that may assume > ethX is the interface name. I personally find them broken. I had to remove checking the name from ethtool to make it work. Ethtool checks for 'eth' or 'usb' in name, which do not work with my e1000 renamed to 'ep0'. -- Tomasz Torcz Only gods can safely risk perfection, zdzichu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx it's a dangerous thing for a man. -- Alia |
| Previous by Date: | Device naming for wireless NICs..., James Ketrenos |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Device naming for wireless NICs..., Matthew Galgoci |
| Previous by Thread: | Device naming for wireless NICs..., James Ketrenos |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Device naming for wireless NICs..., Matthew Galgoci |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |