Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 16:12:53 -0500 (EST) From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@hotjobs.com> To: sthaug@nethelp.no Cc: wilko@yedi.iaf.nl, archie@whistle.com, dfr@nlsystems.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DEVFS, the time has come... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9901281610530.81323-100000@bright.fx.genx.net> In-Reply-To: <7987.917514435@verdi.nethelp.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 28 Jan 1999 sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: > > > I agree.. and same thing goes for Ethernet drivers. I actually > > > like the way Linux always has "eth0", "eth1", ... (which we could > > > > 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. > > I can give you one example. We run a FreeBSD box here which receives > all of the traffic (port mirroring) from some Ethernet switches. On > the FreeBSD box, we run nnstat, tcpdump etc. for monitoring purposes. > > Recently I changed some of the DEC 21x4x based cards on this box to > Intel cards. Thus the interface names changed from deN to fxpN. This > meant we had to update a bunch of Perl and shell scripts. It would > have been much nicer (no need to update) if the interfaces were simply > named ethN. That's why you don't hard code the interfaces into all the scripts. Instead source a file that gives the definitions ala rc.conf. > Personally, I'd also prefer to have IDE disks named daN, but that's > another matter... :) -Alfred 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?Pine.BSF.4.05.9901281610530.81323-100000>