On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 15:05 -0700, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 02:04:04PM -0700, David Wolfskill wrote: > > >From the perspective that NIC-specific variables are of the form > > "ifconfig_${NIC}" (e.g., ifconfig_lo0; ifconfig_ed0; ifconfig_xl0), > > might it make at least as much sense to call it "ifconfig_default" (or > > something similar)? > > I'm divided on that one. The problem is that users may want to name an > interface "default" and this would break that. I like the symetry and > the sort order of ifconfig_default, but I'm concerned about exceptions > to the namespace as well. I'm somewhat tempted by ifconfig_DEFAULT. <thinking outside the box> ifconfig_="...defaults..." </> -- brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] allbery_at_kf8nh.com system administrator [WAY too many hats] allbery_at_ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon univ. KF8NHReceived on Thu Jun 16 2005 - 21:32:26 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:36 UTC