On Tue, 08 Feb 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 01:24:25PM -0800, Oliver Kurth wrote:
> > Wrong.
> > - the orinoco drivers use eth
> > - the hostap drivers use wlan
> > - madwifi uses ath
> > - at76c503 uses wlan
>
> none of the drivers you mention as not using eth%d are i
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > I'll encourage Debian kernel maintainers to make the adequate changes.
>
> No, it's a totally arbitrary and pointless change.
During last two months I have seen at least three people
getting confused why wireless interfaces were denoted
to be w
On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 01:24:25PM -0800, Oliver Kurth wrote:
> Wrong.
> - the orinoco drivers use eth
> - the hostap drivers use wlan
> - madwifi uses ath
> - at76c503 uses wlan
none of the drivers you mention as not using eth%d are in mainline.
And they'll get fixed before merge.
> It seems tha
Moin Oliver!
Oliver Kurth schrieb am Montag, den 07. Februar 2005:
> > > I'll encourage Debian kernel maintainers to make the adequate changes.
> >
> > No, it's a totally arbitrary and pointless change.
>
> It isn't pointless, but it is certainly better to convince upstream and
> have a quasi st
Oliver Kurth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 18:45 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Oliver Kurth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Naming wired network eth%d and wireless wlan%d would make things a lot
>> > easier. For example, it is easier to find out whether to start ifplugd
>> >
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
And here I thought Debian was a distribution which did not needlessly
change upstream policies.
You are aware that a) that will mean all existing documentation on the
ipw2100 and ipw2200 drivers will not work for Debian users and b) that
when the drivers is merged into the m
On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 21:36 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 04:50:27PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Debian is a distribution which tries to provide good software, implying
> > changes if necessary. Wireless interfaces should be called wlan%d, not
> > eth%d, and upstream d
On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 04:50:27PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> Debian is a distribution which tries to provide good software, implying
> changes if necessary. Wireless interfaces should be called wlan%d, not
> eth%d, and upstream doesn't want to change because "There are fewer
> compatability issue
On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 18:45 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Oliver Kurth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Naming wired network eth%d and wireless wlan%d would make things a lot
> > easier. For example, it is easier to find out whether to start ifplugd
> > or waproamd when the interface is created.
Oliver Kurth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Naming wired network eth%d and wireless wlan%d would make things a lot
> easier. For example, it is easier to find out whether to start ifplugd
> or waproamd when the interface is created.
There's other (more resiliant) ways of doing that. In 2.6, wireles
On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 18:17 +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> ma, 2005-02-07 kello 16:50 +0100, Mike Hommey kirjoitti:
> > Wireless interfaces should be called wlan%d, not eth%d
>
> Why is this important? Why does the name of a network interface matter?
> All the tools in Debian that can deal with n
David Goodenough wrote:
> ifrename can of course be used to rename an interface, and it is also
> worth noting that MadWifi uses ath%d, and the RealTech driver uses
> ra%d.
The ralink driver is changing from ra%d to eth%d as eth%d is more
commonly used.
Personally I use nameif to rename my devic
On Monday 07 February 2005 16:17, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> ma, 2005-02-07 kello 16:50 +0100, Mike Hommey kirjoitti:
> > Debian is a distribution which tries to provide good software, implying
> > changes if necessary.
>
> I completely agree with this. If changing a program makes it better,
> Debian
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 18:17:20 +0200, Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ma, 2005-02-07 kello 16:50 +0100, Mike Hommey kirjoitti:
> > Wireless interfaces should be called wlan%d, not eth%d
>
> Why is this important? Why does the name of a network interface matter?
> All the tools in Debian
On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 18:17 +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> neutral about the name and the name isn't particularly significant to
> users either. If one is worried about which interface name corresponds
> to which physical device, guessing from the name is not a good way.
> Using ifconfig or iwconfi
ma, 2005-02-07 kello 16:50 +0100, Mike Hommey kirjoitti:
> Debian is a distribution which tries to provide good software, implying
> changes if necessary.
I completely agree with this. If changing a program makes it better,
Debian should do it even if upstream doesn't. Such changes should be
justi
On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 03:34:22PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Previously Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 03:11:28AM +0100, Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The default interface name of the ipw2X00 driver is, has always been and
>
Previously Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 03:11:28AM +0100, Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The default interface name of the ipw2X00 driver is, has always been and
> > will continue to be, eth%d.
>
> It is and has always been eth%d for a stupid reason. That's
18 matches
Mail list logo
