Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 09:43:33 -0800 (PST) From: David Wolfskill <dhw@whistle.com> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DEVFS, the time has come... Message-ID: <199901281743.JAA19684@pau-amma.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <199901272212.XAA03458@yedi.iaf.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From: Wilko Bulte <wilko@yedi.iaf.nl> >Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 23:12:18 +0100 (CET) >Yeagh... what is wrong with ed0, de0, fxp0 etc that needs changing? Is this >just a matter of taste or is there more to it? I for one don't see any >advantage in eth[0-9] style device naming. It's a matter of whether you want the name to reflect the implementation vs. the function. For someone involved in the details of the implementation, being (acutely!) aware of those details can be very important. For someone who merely wants to have a certain physical port on the machine connected to a particular network, that level of detail is not always appropriate. It depends on your focus. Cheers, david -- David Wolfskill UNIX System Administrator dhw@whistle.com voice: (650) 577-7158 pager: (650) 371-4621 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901281743.JAA19684>