Re: [...] "How does the new naming scheme look like, precisely?"

Re: [...] "How does the new naming scheme look like, precisely?"

[poma]

On 14.03.2017 17:16, Tom Horsley wrote:
> And the consistent names change every single time some
> developer decides he just has to rewrite the algorithm
> to make it better, or systemd decides to engluph yet
> another component and not be backward compatible, or
> a kernel developer gets a new motherboard where the
> scheme doesn't work and his fix has the side effect
> of changing the names on thousands of existing systems, etc.
> 
> There have been at least 3 different "immutable" name
> schemes in the short time the whole concept has existed.
> 
> I finally decided to eradicate it and go back to eth0
> and friends because it was infinitely more reliable than
> having to discover yet another naming scheme in every damn
> release.
> 
> Now my only problem will be that they'll probably keep changing
> the name of the kernel option to disable it :-).
> 

This sounds quite disturbing,
can someone from the systemd and kernel campus comment here,
as Tom claims, whether these are the facts?