On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 20:48:46 +0100, Erwan David wrote: > Le 12/13/2016 à 20:44, Brian a écrit : > > On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 14:40:47 +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 01:36:05PM +0000, Darac Marjal wrote: > >> > >> [...] > >> > >>> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/ > >>> lists three options: > >> > >> Thanks! > > > > For someone who has been using Debian for many years the position you > > expound is understandable and viable to support. Someone who is used to > > eth0 and wlan0 for interface names is bound to sit up and take notice > > when they change to something which is strange and doesn't exactly stick > > in the memory. > > > > But remember new users; does it really matter to them? They have no > > personal history to point to. As you point out, the engineering > > advantages are unarguable. And after all, there are three options which > > can be employed to get something you are not given. That's not bad as > > things go. > > > > Do you think eno167778 will be more useful than eth0 to a new user ? > (yes I've seen the name for the only NIC of a machine)
It is no more nor more less useful than eth0 in the sense that networking works for them. Do you think a new user is going to react in horror to one rather than the other? My God, why must I use eno167778, he will say? I must change this to something I like. connection0 looks good. And so he can. So where's the problem? -- Brian.
