* David Maxwell (david@vex.net) wrote:
> > 
> > But that's going at it the other way around. It's adapting a cryptic pro
> > system to the beginner, and expecting him to do it himself, instead of letting
> > the pros who already have the required knowledge create their own
> > abbreviations.
> 
> What beginner would manage to type 'ifconfig' anything?
> 
> You're trying to put a dent in the Unix learning curve by changing ep0
> to elink0 - That's not going to help, since it doesn't address the real
> issue. Anyone who knows ifconfig exists can probably manage
> 'ifconfig -a'...

I'd have to agree here. I like the BSD way of network device naming too.
Take linux for example, linux uses eth* for everything, which can be
extremely annoying because you can't really see at a first glance which
device is which (if you have different brands of nics in your box). And
by the way, ever nic name in *BSD has a manual page. try man 5 <nic
name> without the device number. Detailed enough for ya?

In fact the name of the nic in ifconfig doesn't really matter, as long
as you can get it up and get it to accept and transmit packets. And no,
terse isn't nessesarily(sp?) bad.

ANd like some others have said: if you want it to work like that unnamed
'operating system' from Redmond, then use that.

My 0.02 euro's,

Cheers,
Emiel Kollof
-- 
All programmers are playwrights and all computers are lousy actors.