Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:03:02 +0300 From: Valentin Nechayev <netch@lucky.net> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: original interface name? (5.*) Message-ID: <20040910200302.GD84228@lucky.net> In-Reply-To: <20040910195826.GE28085@odin.ac.hmc.edu> References: <20040910191831.GP89036@lucky.net> <200409102130.20287.max@love2party.net> <20040910194642.GC84228@lucky.net> <20040910195826.GE28085@odin.ac.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 12:58:26, brooks wrote about "Re: original interface name? (5.*)": >> Device number among with driver name are enough to determine needed >> information based on driver information and boot logs. >> It is pointless to use interface without such information, and it is pointless >> to do manual logging as the only source. > This is a better reason, but if you want the logs to make sense, you > will have to be aware of changes. Hmm, we may want to log(9) renames. > I'm considering adding an ifconfig -v option that would imply -m and add > more details like index, epoch, dname, dunit, etc. Well, both ideas (logging renames and a switch to print more info) are highly pleasant. Thanks in advance for implementation. -netch-
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040910200302.GD84228>