[gentoo-user] Mouse Pad X11
Hi, due the lack of space on my desktop I decided to add a Perixx Peripad 501 Track Pad to my Gentoo Linux. The device came neither with a userguide nor a driver. The according webpage of Perixx does not offer both. According to Xorg.0.log and without any additional tasks, X11 recognized this pad as [24.595] (II) config/udev: Adding input device Mouse Pad (/dev/input/event1) [24.595] (**) Mouse Pad: Applying InputClass evdev pointer catchall [24.595] (II) Using input driver 'evdev' for 'Mouse Pad' [24.596] (**) Mouse Pad: always reports core events [24.596] (**) evdev: Mouse Pad: Device: /dev/input/event1 [24.596] (--) evdev: Mouse Pad: Vendor 0x99a Product 0xa002 [24.596] (--) evdev: Mouse Pad: Found 3 mouse buttons [24.596] (--) evdev: Mouse Pad: Found scroll wheel(s) [24.596] (--) evdev: Mouse Pad: Found relative axes [24.596] (--) evdev: Mouse Pad: Found x and y relative axes [24.596] (II) evdev: Mouse Pad: Configuring as mouse [24.596] (II) evdev: Mouse Pad: Adding scrollwheel support [24.597] (**) evdev: Mouse Pad: YAxisMapping: buttons 4 and 5 [24.597] (**) evdev: Mouse Pad: EmulateWheelButton: 4, EmulateWheelInertia: 10, EmulateWheelTimeout: 200 [24.597] (**) Option config_info udev:/sys/devices/platform/omap/musb-ti81xx/musb-hdrc.1/usb1/1-1/1-1.2/1-1.2:1.0/input/input1/event1 [24.597] (II) XINPUT: Adding extended input device Mouse Pad (type: MOUSE, id 7) [24.597] (II) evdev: Mouse Pad: initialized for relative axes. [24.599] (**) Mouse Pad: (accel) keeping acceleration scheme 1 [24.599] (**) Mouse Pad: (accel) acceleration profile 0 [24.599] (**) Mouse Pad: (accel) acceleration factor: 2.000 [24.599] (**) Mouse Pad: (accel) acceleration threshold: 4 [24.601] (II) config/udev: Adding input device Mouse Pad (/dev/input/mouse0) [24.601] (II) No input driver specified, ignoring this device. [24.601] (II) This device may have been added with another device file. It works: That is: I can move the cursor arround and I can perform clicks by tapping on the pad. The mechanical present buttons will be recognized as button 1 and button 3. As far as I can see from the output of xev, double tapping on the pad will also be recognized as button 1. But the log tells me of three button mouse and adding scrollwheel support... I googled for any information but beside a massive presence of Synaptics stuff there was no information I can use... How can I activate/use the additional functionality as reported by the log file? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 21:14:39 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: * on a machine with multiple network cards *ALL USING DIFFERENT DRIVERS* * drivers are built as modules, not built-in into the kernel * is it possible to set things up so that the network driver modules do not load automatically at bootup? * have a script in /etc/local.d/ (or wherever) modprobe the drivers in the desired order I can see complications involving services that depend on net (e.g. sshd), but in general, would it work reliably? What happens if one of the modules fails to load for any reason? If you need persistent device names, set up rules to give them, but use names outside of the kernel namespace to avoid the problems that udev is trying to avoid with its new naming rules. -- Neil Bothwick Where do you think you're going today? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On Saturday 06 Apr 2013 09:43:28 Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 21:14:39 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: * on a machine with multiple network cards *ALL USING DIFFERENT DRIVERS* * drivers are built as modules, not built-in into the kernel * is it possible to set things up so that the network driver modules do not load automatically at bootup? * have a script in /etc/local.d/ (or wherever) modprobe the drivers in the desired order I can see complications involving services that depend on net (e.g. sshd), but in general, would it work reliably? What happens if one of the modules fails to load for any reason? If you need persistent device names, set up rules to give them, but use names outside of the kernel namespace to avoid the problems that udev is trying to avoid with its new naming rules. Answering Walter's question - from my experience on at least two boxen that I've rebooted since udev 200: My ethernet cards which had their driver built in the kernel were renamed by udev to the enp_something predictable name. The wireless cards that I had them built as modules remained the same as before; e.g. wlan0. I only have one wireless card in each machine so I don't know if the naming will get mixed up, if I had more than one and the kernel decided to modprobe them in a different order. I expect that it would rename them as it would do before udev-200, in which case a 70-net-names.rules would bring things back to even keel. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On Apr 6, 2013 3:44 PM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 21:14:39 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: * on a machine with multiple network cards *ALL USING DIFFERENT DRIVERS* * drivers are built as modules, not built-in into the kernel * is it possible to set things up so that the network driver modules do not load automatically at bootup? * have a script in /etc/local.d/ (or wherever) modprobe the drivers in the desired order I can see complications involving services that depend on net (e.g. sshd), but in general, would it work reliably? What happens if one of the modules fails to load for any reason? If you need persistent device names, set up rules to give them, but use names outside of the kernel namespace to avoid kk problems that udev is trying to avoid with its new naming rules.ooh Ahhh... I think now I understand... So. Here's my summarization of the situation: * The ethX naming can change, i.e., the interfaces can get out of order * So, to fix this, udev decided to use the physical attachment points of the NIC in driving a persistent name, a name that will be identical across boots as long as there is no hardware change * In doing so, it also frees the 'traditional' ethX names to be used * If one wants, one can still 'rename' the NICs to the 'traditional' names using the 70-*.rules script * Doing so (specifying the NICs' names using the 70-*r.rules script) will also disable the new 'persistent naming' system -- for the NICs specified in the 70-*r.rules file * Therefore, users that will be impacted are those that upgraded udev but doesn't have the 70-*r.rules, for udev will then assign new names for the NICs * For these users, specifying the netsomething switch for the kernel (sorry, forgot the complete switch) will disable the new naming system So, have I gotten everything correctly? CMIIW, please. Rgds, --
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 19:11:46 +0700 Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: On Apr 6, 2013 3:44 PM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 21:14:39 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: * on a machine with multiple network cards *ALL USING DIFFERENT DRIVERS* * drivers are built as modules, not built-in into the kernel * is it possible to set things up so that the network driver modules do not load automatically at bootup? * have a script in /etc/local.d/ (or wherever) modprobe the drivers in the desired order I can see complications involving services that depend on net (e.g. sshd), but in general, would it work reliably? What happens if one of the modules fails to load for any reason? If you need persistent device names, set up rules to give them, but use names outside of the kernel namespace to avoid kk problems that udev is trying to avoid with its new naming rules.ooh Ahhh... I think now I understand... So. Here's my summarization of the situation: * The ethX naming can change, i.e., the interfaces can get out of order * So, to fix this, udev decided to use the physical attachment points of the NIC in driving a persistent name, a name that will be identical across boots as long as there is no hardware change There are also other ways such as using the mac address (disabled by default). * In doing so, it also frees the 'traditional' ethX names to be used No. The eth[0-9]+ namespace is not free, it has always been used by the linux kernel, and will stay so. * If one wants, one can still 'rename' the NICs to the 'traditional' names using the 70-*.rules script * Doing so (specifying the NICs' names using the 70-*r.rules script) will also disable the new 'persistent naming' system -- for the NICs specified in the 70-*r.rules file * Therefore, users that will be impacted are those that upgraded udev but doesn't have the 70-*r.rules, for udev will then assign new names for the NICs * For these users, specifying the netsomething switch for the kernel (sorry, forgot the complete switch) will disable the new naming system So, have I gotten everything correctly? Almost, except you should not specify a name that is also eth[0-9]+ (what you called 'traditional' name), since it can cause a race condition where the kernel and udev fight for the name. While it used to be the case (i.e. udev-197) that udev tries to handle the race condition, the devs has decided to remove those code. Regards, Kerwin. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Problem compiling dev-lang/v8
On Friday 05 April 2013 21:58:32 Peter Humphrey wrote: ---8 Why does emerge want to emerge chromium? Have I tripped over a line length limit? Have I got a circular dependency? What else might be wrong? I can't see anything relevant at BGO. Well, what d'you know? Today it worked just fine. No new version from syncing, no reboot, no logout - everything exactly the same AFAICS. Sorry for the noise. -- Peter
[gentoo-user] Myrient Fiberchannel Drivers
Hello Everyone, On our test machines we are using and EOL Myrinet fibercahnnel card: 01:05.0 Network controller: MYRICOM Inc. Myrinet 2000 Scalable Cluster Interconnect (rev 03) The problem is that their open source driver only supports up to 2.6 kernels. And with us running gentoo 3.x kernel headers we are just not going back to that for reasons known to the list... Are there: * any generic drivers we can use? * Can we hack the driver to run on the servers? I hope I did not just purchase hardware that our OS does not support. It's been a while since i've done that Your help is greatly appreciated, Nick.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On 2013-04-06 8:31 AM, kwk...@hkbn.net kwk...@hkbn.net wrote: Almost, except you should not specify a name that is also eth[0-9]+ (what you called 'traditional' name), since it can cause a race condition where the kernel and udev fight for the name. While it used to be the case (i.e. udev-197) that udev tries to handle the race condition, the devs has decided to remove those code. Ok, thanks, I *think* I've got a handle on this now (sorry for being so dense)... So, other than userland scripts that I created myself and know where they live, where do I search for any files/scripts created/generated/maintained by the system, for references to eth0/1 to change to net0/1? Is it just /etc/conf.d?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On 2013-04-05 4:11 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 02:38:21PM -0500, Bruce Hill wrote: Just dealing with one server and my Linux router, they've been updated to sys-fs/udev-200 and are both still using the same /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules file they've had for over a year, which was working with udev-171. Do you have your network interface drivers built into the kernel or are they modules? I'm very interested in the significance of this question... My server is module free, so all drivers are built into the kernel. Does this provide for another option and/or make things easier?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 10:22:49 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: So, other than userland scripts that I created myself and know where they live, where do I search for any files/scripts created/generated/maintained by the system, for references to eth0/1 to change to net0/1? Is it just /etc/conf.d? /etc/udev/rules.d Or grep -r 'eth[0-9]' /etc. -- Neil Bothwick Sure, we just route the main sensor through Data's cat. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On Apr 6, 2013 7:32 PM, kwk...@hkbn.net wrote: On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 19:11:46 +0700 Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: On Apr 6, 2013 3:44 PM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 21:14:39 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: * on a machine with multiple network cards *ALL USING DIFFERENT DRIVERS* * drivers are built as modules, not built-in into the kernel * is it possible to set things up so that the network driver modules do not load automatically at bootup? * have a script in /etc/local.d/ (or wherever) modprobe the drivers in the desired order I can see complications involving services that depend on net (e.g. sshd), but in general, would it work reliably? What happens if one of the modules fails to load for any reason? If you need persistent device names, set up rules to give them, but use names outside of the kernel namespace to avoid kk problems that udev is trying to avoid with its new naming rules.ooh Ahhh... I think now I understand... So. Here's my summarization of the situation: * The ethX naming can change, i.e., the interfaces can get out of order * So, to fix this, udev decided to use the physical attachment points of the NIC in driving a persistent name, a name that will be identical across boots as long as there is no hardware change There are also other ways such as using the mac address (disabled by default). * In doing so, it also frees the 'traditional' ethX names to be used No. The eth[0-9]+ namespace is not free, it has always been used by the linux kernel, and will stay so. * If one wants, one can still 'rename' the NICs to the 'traditional' names using the 70-*.rules script * Doing so (specifying the NICs' names using the 70-*r.rules script) will also disable the new 'persistent naming' system -- for the NICs specified in the 70-*r.rules file * Therefore, users that will be impacted are those that upgraded udev but doesn't have the 70-*r.rules, for udev will then assign new names for the NICs * For these users, specifying the netsomething switch for the kernel (sorry, forgot the complete switch) will disable the new naming system So, have I gotten everything correctly? Almost, except you should not specify a name that is also eth[0-9]+ (what you called 'traditional' name), since it can cause a race condition where the kernel and udev fight for the name. While it used to be the case (i.e. udev-197) that udev tries to handle the race condition, the devs has decided to remove those code. Regards, Kerwin. Ah, thanks for the clarification! :-) So, from now on, for safety I'm going to use a custom naming scheme, like lan[0-9]+ or wan[0-9]+ or wifi[0-9]+, anything that won't collide with kernel names of eth[0-9]+ Now I only had to figure out how to rename eth[0-9]+ to the custom naming scheme when using mdev. Rgds, --
[gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
After updating our systems we lost network connectivity to the servers. When trying to start net.eth0 we got the following message: /ib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is wireless command not found /etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists command not found Errror: Interface eth0 does not exist Ensure that you have loaded the correct kernel modules for your hardware # lsmod module used by tg3 0 lbphytg3 eth0 flags=4098broadcast,multicast mtu 1500 interrupt=16 lo flags=73UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING mtu 16436 inet 127.0.0.1 BROADCAST 255.255.255.0 inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10 host Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME! Your help is greatly appreciated, Nick
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On 2013-04-06 10:40 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 10:22:49 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: So, other than userland scripts that I created myself and know where they live, where do I search for any files/scripts created/generated/maintained by the system, for references to eth0/1 to change to net0/1? Is it just /etc/conf.d? /etc/udev/rules.d Or grep -r 'eth[0-9]' /etc. Perfect, thanks Neil...
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 07:11:46PM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
Ahhh... I think now I understand...
So. Here's my summarization of the situation:
* The ethX naming can change, i.e., the interfaces can get out of order
* So, to fix this, udev decided to use the physical attachment points of
the NIC in driving a persistent name, a name that will be identical across
boots as long as there is no hardware change
* In doing so, it also frees the 'traditional' ethX names to be used
* If one wants, one can still 'rename' the NICs to the 'traditional' names
using the 70-*.rules script
* Doing so (specifying the NICs' names using the 70-*r.rules script) will
also disable the new 'persistent naming' system -- for the NICs specified
in the 70-*r.rules file
* Therefore, users that will be impacted are those that upgraded udev but
doesn't have the 70-*r.rules, for udev will then assign new names for the
NICs
* For these users, specifying the netsomething switch for the kernel
(sorry, forgot the complete switch) will disable the new naming system
So, have I gotten everything correctly?
Works for me...
mingdao@router ~ $ cat /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules
# This file was automatically generated by the /lib/udev/write_net_rules
# program, run by the persistent-net-generator.rules rules file.
#
# You can modify it, as long as you keep each rule on a single
# line, and change only the value of the NAME= key.
# PCI device 0x8086:0x10d3 (e1000e)
SUBSYSTEM==net, ACTION==add, DRIVERS==?*,
ATTR{address}==68:05:ca:03:05:5d, ATTR{dev_id}==0x0, ATTR{type}==1,
KERNEL==eth*, NAME=eth0
# PCI device 0x8086:0x10d3 (e1000e)
SUBSYSTEM==net, ACTION==add, DRIVERS==?*,
ATTR{address}==68:05:ca:03:05:50, ATTR{dev_id}==0x0, ATTR{type}==1,
KERNEL==eth*, NAME=eth1
# PCI device 0x10de:0x03ef (forcedeth)
SUBSYSTEM==net, ACTION==add, DRIVERS==?*,
ATTR{address}==f4:6d:04:e8:1d:d9, ATTR{dev_id}==0x0, ATTR{type}==1,
KERNEL==eth*, NAME=eth2
mingdao@router ~ $ ip addr show
1: lo: LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
2: dummy0: BROADCAST,NOARP mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN
link/ether f2:58:cb:48:72:b3 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
3: eth0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP
qlen 1000
link/ether 68:05:ca:03:05:50 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 192.168.54.1/24 brd 192.168.54.255 scope global eth0
4: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP
qlen 1000
link/ether 68:05:ca:03:05:5d brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 192.168.100.1/24 brd 192.168.100.255 scope global eth1
5: eth2: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP
qlen 1000
link/ether f4:6d:04:e8:1d:d9 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet public IP brd munged scope global eth2
If these NICs don't get assigned correctly, this whole LAN fails.
--
Happy Penguin Computers ')
126 Fenco Drive ( \
Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^
supp...@happypenguincomputers.com
662-269-2706 662-205-6424
http://happypenguincomputers.com/
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
Re: [gentoo-user] Mouse Pad X11
On Sat, 2013-04-06 at 08:32 +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: How can I activate/use the additional functionality as reported by the log file? I'm not familiar with that device, but I do have a suggestion: does it respond to multitouch gestures? For example, with my trackpad on my T530, I can scroll by swiping up and down with two fingers. Does that work? -- R
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Hi, Nick. On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:51:42AM -0400, Nick Khamis wrote: After updating our systems we lost network connectivity to the servers. When trying to start net.eth0 we got the following message: /ib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is wireless command not found /etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists command not found Errror: Interface eth0 does not exist Ensure that you have loaded the correct kernel modules for your hardware # lsmod module used by tg3 0 lbphytg3 eth0 flags=4098broadcast,multicast mtu 1500 interrupt=16 lo flags=73UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING mtu 16436 inet 127.0.0.1 BROADCAST 255.255.255.0 inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10 host Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME! No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody. udev-200 now renames eth0, eth1, to something else, dependent upon complicated rules. In my case eth0 has become p6p1, though many people seem to have got longer names. Have a look in /sys/class/net and see if your new name is there. If so, edit all your config files containing eth0, switching to the new name. Once you got that done and things work again, take a deep breath and have a look at the most recent Gentoo news item ($ eselect news read) which explains it all, more or less. Then decide whether the above is a long term solution, and if not start reading docs about writing udev rules. Yes, it's a pain in the backside. But at least with Gentoo, you've a good chance of fixing things like this quickly. Your help is greatly appreciated, Nick -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
On 06/04/2013 17:57, Alan Mackenzie wrote: Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME! No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody. udev-200 now renames eth0, eth1, Please please PLEASE, for the love of god joseph mary and every other $DEITY on the planet STOP SPREADING THIS FUD It did not happen to pretty much everybody. It happened to people who blindly updated thignsd and walked away, who did not read the news announcement, who did not read the CLEARLY WORDED wiki article at freedesktop.org or alternatively went into mod-induced panic and started making shit up in their heads. @Nick: all you have to do is run eselect news and read what is there. It is all very clearly worded and makes complete sense when read in conjunction with the wiki page (link is in the news statement). Unless you have a very complex setup with multiple NICs (and especially if they are USB based) you will find that the docs probably cover your case completely (just add common sense and a bit of understanding about what udev does on a Linux system). All that happened is that the thing you used to know as eth0 now has a different name. The most important thing you need to remember is you cannot safely rename that NIC to ethX as this can collide with what the kernel drivers are trying to do. And that is all that happened here. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Mouse Pad X11
Randy Barlow ra...@electronsweatshop.com [13-04-06 17:24]: On Sat, 2013-04-06 at 08:32 +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: How can I activate/use the additional functionality as reported by the log file? I'm not familiar with that device, but I do have a suggestion: does it respond to multitouch gestures? For example, with my trackpad on my T530, I can scroll by swiping up and down with two fingers. Does that work? -- R Hi Randy, thank you for your reply! :) I tried that ... but with no luck. The device is advertised with: Product Feature: - Cirque Glidepoint Technology - High reliable micro-switches - 2 buttons mouse clicker attached - you could also use your finger tip to tap the touchpad. for ex: 2 taps = double click, 2 fingers tap = scroll, 3 fingers tap = Right Click - USB interface connector - One touch scrolling I tried that...beside the most simple action nothing works. Since there was no driver delivered with the device and no user guide, I think plug and pray should do the magic_should_ One touch scrolling and 2 fingers tap = scroll is a contradiction, isn't it? Is there anything I have to configure (xorg.conf?) additionally? Thank you very much for any help in advance! Best regards, mcc
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
'Evening, Alan.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 06:36:07PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 06/04/2013 17:57, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and
typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to
IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME!
No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody. udev-200
now renames eth0, eth1,
Please please PLEASE, for the love of god joseph mary and every other
$DEITY on the planet
STOP SPREADING THIS FUD
It did not happen to pretty much everybody. It happened to people who
blindly updated thignsd and walked away, who did not read the news
announcement, who did not read the CLEARLY WORDED wiki article at
freedesktop.org or alternatively went into mod-induced panic and started
making shit up in their heads.
Steady on, old chap! By it I was meaning the general inconvenience
all round occasioned by the changes between udev-{197,200}. Not
everybody encountered this. For example Dale, and Walt D. didn't have
to do anything. But pretty much everybody else did.
I was just trying to help Nick get his servers back up asap. I should
imagine having down servers is even more nerve wracking than down
desktops. (Down pillows are OK, though ;-).
I've now got p6p1 instead of eth0. It's irritating, but not irritating
enough for me to be bothered to do anything about it.
--
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
Re: [gentoo-user] Problem compiling dev-lang/v8
On Saturday 06 Apr 2013 15:07:45 Peter Humphrey wrote: On Friday 05 April 2013 21:58:32 Peter Humphrey wrote: ---8 Why does emerge want to emerge chromium? Have I tripped over a line length limit? Have I got a circular dependency? What else might be wrong? I can't see anything relevant at BGO. Well, what d'you know? Today it worked just fine. No new version from syncing, no reboot, no logout - everything exactly the same AFAICS. Sorry for the noise. It happened to me too on one box only. :-/ I didn't even resync if I recall correctly. Just rebooted at some point and tried again an emerge -uaDv world waiting for some error, which never came. Strange ... unless I am getting mixed up between different arches ... -- Regards, Mick smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Mouse Pad X11
meino.cra...@gmx.de meino.cra...@gmx.de [13-04-06 18:52]: Randy Barlow ra...@electronsweatshop.com [13-04-06 17:24]: On Sat, 2013-04-06 at 08:32 +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: How can I activate/use the additional functionality as reported by the log file? I'm not familiar with that device, but I do have a suggestion: does it respond to multitouch gestures? For example, with my trackpad on my T530, I can scroll by swiping up and down with two fingers. Does that work? -- R Hi Randy, thank you for your reply! :) I tried that ... but with no luck. The device is advertised with: Product Feature: - Cirque Glidepoint Technology - High reliable micro-switches - 2 buttons mouse clicker attached - you could also use your finger tip to tap the touchpad. for ex: 2 taps = double click, 2 fingers tap = scroll, 3 fingers tap = Right Click - USB interface connector - One touch scrolling I tried that...beside the most simple action nothing works. Since there was no driver delivered with the device and no user guide, I think plug and pray should do the magic_should_ One touch scrolling and 2 fingers tap = scroll is a contradiction, isn't it? Is there anything I have to configure (xorg.conf?) additionally? Thank you very much for any help in advance! Best regards, mcc Hi, found something: A review on www.amazon.com of this device states, that the EasyCat manual is useable when it comes to the tap/click/scroll behaviour/ useage of the PERIXX PERIPAD 501. Vie google I found cirquecattouchpadguide_revf.pdf which clearifies the needed geatures. For scrolling one has to move ONE finger on the right edge of the pad. And it scrolls! BUT unfortunately the scrollevents ALWAYS reach the taskbar and I am warped through my desktops regardless of the focus a certain windows has. This even happens, when the cursor and the focus is on the window of xev, with which I tried to catch the even. How can I channelize the events to the focussed window? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
On 06-Apr-13 19:10, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
STOP SPREADING THIS FUD
It did not happen to pretty much everybody. It happened to people who
blindly updated thignsd and walked away, who did not read the news
announcement, who did not read the CLEARLY WORDED wiki article at
freedesktop.org or alternatively went into mod-induced panic and started
making shit up in their heads.
Steady on, old chap! By it I was meaning the general inconvenience
all round occasioned by the changes between udev-{197,200}. Not
everybody encountered this. For example Dale, and Walt D. didn't have
to do anything. But pretty much everybody else did.
The problem is, news item is not correct! I followed it
and yet finished with server having old network name (eth0).
Problem was the point 4. in news item, which is not quite clear:
-
4. predictable network interface names:
If /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules is an empty file
or a symlink to /dev/null, the new names will be disabled and
the kernel will do all the interface naming...
-
Well, in my case 80-net-names-slot.rules was neither empty,
nor symlink to dev null, but FULL OF COMMENTS AND NOTING ELSE,
which basically did the same thing as empty file: disabled
new network names. Unfortunatelly, I found it just after
screwed reboot. But I did everything I found in news item:
checked and verified that file was not symlink to /dev/null
and that it was not empty (1667 bytes does not seem to me
to be empty file).
As I wrote previously, I am pretty sure I never created this
file manually so it must have been created by som previous
udev-version. So I finished up with similar problem as OP:
after rebooting I did not find interface I expected. The
only difference is I expected already interface with new
name, and OP is probably the old one...
So I must add my point to complaining about news item
not beeing quite clear. And this happens quite often...
Jarry
--
___
This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists!
Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted.
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Am 06.04.2013 17:57, schrieb Alan Mackenzie:
Hi, Nick.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:51:42AM -0400, Nick Khamis wrote:
After updating our systems we lost network connectivity to the
servers. When trying to start net.eth0 we got the following message:
/ib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is wireless command not found
/etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists command not found
Errror: Interface eth0 does not exist
Ensure that you have loaded the correct kernel modules for your hardware
# lsmod
module used by
tg3 0
lbphytg3
eth0
flags=4098broadcast,multicast mtu 1500
interrupt=16
lo
flags=73UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING mtu 16436
inet 127.0.0.1 BROADCAST 255.255.255.0
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10 host
Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and
typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to
IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME!
No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody. udev-200
now renames eth0, eth1, to something else, dependent upon
complicated rules. In my case eth0 has become p6p1, though many people
seem to have got longer names.
Have a look in /sys/class/net and see if your new name is there. If so,
edit all your config files containing eth0, switching to the new name.
Once you got that done and things work again, take a deep breath and have
a look at the most recent Gentoo news item ($ eselect news read) which
explains it all, more or less. Then decide whether the above is a long
term solution, and if not start reading docs about writing udev rules.
Yes, it's a pain in the backside. But at least with Gentoo, you've a
good chance of fixing things like this quickly.
Your help is greatly appreciated,
Nick
in my case it is still eth0:
ifconfig
eth0: flags=4163UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST mtu 1500
inet 192.168.178.21 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast
192.168.178.255
inet6 fe80::1e6f:65ff:fe87:6f6a prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20link
ether 1c:6f:65:87:6f:6a txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
RX packets 4647305 bytes 6693078055 (6.2 GiB)
RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 2943816 bytes 226871998 (216.3 MiB)
TX errors 0 dropped 1 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
sys-fs/udev
Available versions: (~)168-r2[1] [M]171-r10 197-r8^t{tbz2}
(~)198-r6^t{tbz2} (~)199-r1^t{tbz2} 200^t{tbz2} **^t {acl
action_modeswitch build debug doc edd extras +firmware-loader floppy
gudev hwdb introspection keymap +kmod +openrc +rule_generator selinux
static-libs test}
Installed versions: 200^t{tbz2}(18:30:31
29.03.2013)(firmware-loader gudev hwdb keymap kmod openrc -acl -doc
-introspection -selinux -static-libs)
I did keep net.eth0
Re: [gentoo-user] Mouse Pad X11
On Sat, 2013-04-06 at 18:48 +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: One touch scrolling and 2 fingers tap = scroll is a contradiction, isn't it? Haha, yeah it is confusing sounding. Perhaps one touch scrolling means you can scroll by using a single finger on the right side of the pad? A lot of trackpads work that way, or can be configured to work that way. Is there anything I have to configure (xorg.conf?) additionally? I remember there being some kind of z axis setting, or something perhaps a little along those lines in xorg.conf. To be honest, it's been years since I last did anything with an xorg.conf since the modern Xorg is much better at automatically configuring itself, so I'm afraid I can't help you much in that department. One way that might be easy but depends on your desktop environment, is to check if there is an easy to use setting provided by your DE that can configure two finger scrolling. For example, I'm currently using Gnome 3.6 in Fedora (yeah, not Gentoo, but I'm on my work computer :) ) and I have a Two finger scroll checkbox in the Mouse Touchpad section of the System Settings program. There's also a checkbox for Tap to click. I use Gnome 2 stable on my home Gentoo computer, and I *think* it may have something similar, but I'm not there to verify (and it's a desktop computer with no trackpad so I've never used that feature there.) I used to use KDE in Gentoo at my previous job, and I believe it had something similar in its settings but I don't have any current KDE installs to check it with. If you aren't using either of those, perhaps your DE provides something like that too. If not, perhaps someone else on here will chime in :) Thank you very much for any help in advance! No problem, and apologies that it's not super complete. I'm more of a backend kind of dude, so my familiarity with DE stuff is mostly from a user's perspective (i.e., GUI configuration). -- Randy Barlow
[gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Jarry wrote:
On 06-Apr-13 19:10, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
STOP SPREADING THIS FUD
It did not happen to pretty much everybody. It happened to people who
blindly updated thignsd and walked away, who did not read the news
announcement, who did not read the CLEARLY WORDED wiki article at
freedesktop.org or alternatively went into mod-induced panic and started
making shit up in their heads.
Steady on, old chap! By it I was meaning the general inconvenience
all round occasioned by the changes between udev-{197,200}. Not
everybody encountered this. For example Dale, and Walt D. didn't have
to do anything. But pretty much everybody else did.
The problem is, news item is not correct! I followed it
and yet finished with server having old network name (eth0).
Problem was the point 4. in news item, which is not quite clear:
-
4. predictable network interface names:
If /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules is an empty file
or a symlink to /dev/null, the new names will be disabled and
the kernel will do all the interface naming...
-
Well, in my case 80-net-names-slot.rules was neither empty,
nor symlink to dev null, but FULL OF COMMENTS AND NOTING ELSE,
which basically did the same thing as empty file: disabled
new network names. Unfortunatelly, I found it just after
screwed reboot. But I did everything I found in news item:
checked and verified that file was not symlink to /dev/null
and that it was not empty (1667 bytes does not seem to me
to be empty file).
As I wrote previously, I am pretty sure I never created this
file manually so it must have been created by som previous
udev-version. So I finished up with similar problem as OP:
after rebooting I did not find interface I expected. The
only difference is I expected already interface with new
name, and OP is probably the old one...
You're not alone, this happened for me on all my 4 machines.
So I must add my point to complaining about news item
not beeing quite clear. And this happens quite often...
- Jörg
Re: [gentoo-user] Mouse Pad X11
On Sat, 2013-04-06 at 19:49 +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: For scrolling one has to move ONE finger on the right edge of the pad. And it scrolls! BUT unfortunately the scrollevents ALWAYS reach the taskbar and I am warped through my desktops regardless of the focus a certain windows has. This even happens, when the cursor and the focus is on the window of xev, with which I tried to catch the even. How can I channelize the events to the focussed window? This is very unexpected behavior. I'd be very surprised if the hardware is capable of causing this behavior, unless it is somehow sending a set of keyboard shortcuts that correspond to switching desktops. I'd bet that if you are having that problem, a normal mouse's scrollwheel would cause the exact same problem. Do you have a normal USB mouse that you can try that with? If the problem happens with a USB mouse as well, I'd guess that something is configured strangely in your desktop environment's settings. If the USB mouse behaves normally, I guess something must be really weird about that touchpad, but I'm not sure what it would be. -- R
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
On Saturday 06 Apr 2013 20:03:15 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am 06.04.2013 17:57, schrieb Alan Mackenzie:
Hi, Nick.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:51:42AM -0400, Nick Khamis wrote:
After updating our systems we lost network connectivity to the
servers. When trying to start net.eth0 we got the following message:
/ib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is wireless command not found
/etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists command not found
Errror: Interface eth0 does not exist
Ensure that you have loaded the correct kernel modules for your hardware
# lsmod
module used by
tg3 0
lbphytg3
eth0
flags=4098broadcast,multicast mtu 1500
interrupt=16
lo
flags=73UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING mtu 16436
inet 127.0.0.1 BROADCAST 255.255.255.0
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10 host
Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and
typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to
IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME!
No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody. udev-200
now renames eth0, eth1, to something else, dependent upon
complicated rules. In my case eth0 has become p6p1, though many people
seem to have got longer names.
Have a look in /sys/class/net and see if your new name is there. If so,
edit all your config files containing eth0, switching to the new name.
Once you got that done and things work again, take a deep breath and have
a look at the most recent Gentoo news item ($ eselect news read) which
explains it all, more or less. Then decide whether the above is a long
term solution, and if not start reading docs about writing udev rules.
Yes, it's a pain in the backside. But at least with Gentoo, you've a
good chance of fixing things like this quickly.
Your help is greatly appreciated,
Nick
in my case it is still eth0:
ifconfig
eth0: flags=4163UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST mtu 1500
inet 192.168.178.21 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast
192.168.178.255
inet6 fe80::1e6f:65ff:fe87:6f6a prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20link
ether 1c:6f:65:87:6f:6a txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
RX packets 4647305 bytes 6693078055 (6.2 GiB)
RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 2943816 bytes 226871998 (216.3 MiB)
TX errors 0 dropped 1 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
sys-fs/udev
Available versions: (~)168-r2[1] [M]171-r10 197-r8^t{tbz2}
(~)198-r6^t{tbz2} (~)199-r1^t{tbz2} 200^t{tbz2} **^t {acl
action_modeswitch build debug doc edd extras +firmware-loader floppy
gudev hwdb introspection keymap +kmod +openrc +rule_generator selinux
static-libs test}
Installed versions: 200^t{tbz2}(18:30:31
29.03.2013)(firmware-loader gudev hwdb keymap kmod openrc -acl -doc
-introspection -selinux -static-libs)
I did keep net.eth0
Is your eth0 NIC a module (modprobed), or built in the kernel?
--
Regards,
Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Mouse Pad X11
On Saturday 06 Apr 2013 18:49:31 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: meino.cra...@gmx.de meino.cra...@gmx.de [13-04-06 18:52]: Randy Barlow ra...@electronsweatshop.com [13-04-06 17:24]: On Sat, 2013-04-06 at 08:32 +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: How can I activate/use the additional functionality as reported by the log file? I'm not familiar with that device, but I do have a suggestion: does it respond to multitouch gestures? For example, with my trackpad on my T530, I can scroll by swiping up and down with two fingers. Does that work? Hi Randy, thank you for your reply! :) I tried that ... but with no luck. The device is advertised with: Product Feature: - Cirque Glidepoint Technology - High reliable micro-switches - 2 buttons mouse clicker attached - you could also use your finger tip to tap the touchpad. for ex: 2 taps = double click, 2 fingers tap = scroll, 3 fingers tap = Right Click - USB interface connector - One touch scrolling I tried that...beside the most simple action nothing works. Since there was no driver delivered with the device and no user guide, I think plug and pray should do the magic_should_ One touch scrolling and 2 fingers tap = scroll is a contradiction, isn't it? Is there anything I have to configure (xorg.conf?) additionally? Thank you very much for any help in advance! Best regards, mcc Hi, found something: A review on www.amazon.com of this device states, that the EasyCat manual is useable when it comes to the tap/click/scroll behaviour/ useage of the PERIXX PERIPAD 501. Vie google I found cirquecattouchpadguide_revf.pdf which clearifies the needed geatures. For scrolling one has to move ONE finger on the right edge of the pad. And it scrolls! BUT unfortunately the scrollevents ALWAYS reach the taskbar and I am warped through my desktops regardless of the focus a certain windows has. This even happens, when the cursor and the focus is on the window of xev, with which I tried to catch the even. How can I channelize the events to the focussed window? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc Did you try taping once (or twice in quick succession - double click) to select an application window first? Do you get a different scroll event if instead of moving your finger up/down on the right edge of the pad, or left/right at the bottom end of the pad, you move up/down two fingers apart from each other? -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Am 06.04.2013 21:33, schrieb Mick:
On Saturday 06 Apr 2013 20:03:15 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am 06.04.2013 17:57, schrieb Alan Mackenzie:
Hi, Nick.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:51:42AM -0400, Nick Khamis wrote:
After updating our systems we lost network connectivity to the
servers. When trying to start net.eth0 we got the following message:
/ib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is wireless command not found
/etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists command not found
Errror: Interface eth0 does not exist
Ensure that you have loaded the correct kernel modules for your hardware
# lsmod
module used by
tg3 0
lbphytg3
eth0
flags=4098broadcast,multicast mtu 1500
interrupt=16
lo
flags=73UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING mtu 16436
inet 127.0.0.1 BROADCAST 255.255.255.0
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10 host
Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and
typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to
IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME!
No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody. udev-200
now renames eth0, eth1, to something else, dependent upon
complicated rules. In my case eth0 has become p6p1, though many people
seem to have got longer names.
Have a look in /sys/class/net and see if your new name is there. If so,
edit all your config files containing eth0, switching to the new name.
Once you got that done and things work again, take a deep breath and have
a look at the most recent Gentoo news item ($ eselect news read) which
explains it all, more or less. Then decide whether the above is a long
term solution, and if not start reading docs about writing udev rules.
Yes, it's a pain in the backside. But at least with Gentoo, you've a
good chance of fixing things like this quickly.
Your help is greatly appreciated,
Nick
in my case it is still eth0:
ifconfig
eth0: flags=4163UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST mtu 1500
inet 192.168.178.21 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast
192.168.178.255
inet6 fe80::1e6f:65ff:fe87:6f6a prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20link
ether 1c:6f:65:87:6f:6a txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
RX packets 4647305 bytes 6693078055 (6.2 GiB)
RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 2943816 bytes 226871998 (216.3 MiB)
TX errors 0 dropped 1 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
sys-fs/udev
Available versions: (~)168-r2[1] [M]171-r10 197-r8^t{tbz2}
(~)198-r6^t{tbz2} (~)199-r1^t{tbz2} 200^t{tbz2} **^t {acl
action_modeswitch build debug doc edd extras +firmware-loader floppy
gudev hwdb introspection keymap +kmod +openrc +rule_generator selinux
static-libs test}
Installed versions: 200^t{tbz2}(18:30:31
29.03.2013)(firmware-loader gudev hwdb keymap kmod openrc -acl -doc
-introspection -selinux -static-libs)
I did keep net.eth0
Is your eth0 NIC a module (modprobed), or built in the kernel?
r8169 41918 0
module
[gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am 06.04.2013 21:33, schrieb Mick:
On Saturday 06 Apr 2013 20:03:15 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am 06.04.2013 17:57, schrieb Alan Mackenzie:
Hi, Nick.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:51:42AM -0400, Nick Khamis wrote:
After updating our systems we lost network connectivity to the
servers. When trying to start net.eth0 we got the following message:
/ib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is wireless command not
found /etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists command not found
Errror: Interface eth0 does not exist
Ensure that you have loaded the correct kernel modules for your
hardware
# lsmod
module used by
tg3 0
lbphytg3
eth0
flags=4098broadcast,multicast mtu 1500
interrupt=16
lo
flags=73UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING mtu 16436
inet 127.0.0.1 BROADCAST 255.255.255.0
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10 host
Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and
typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to
IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME!
No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody.
udev-200 now renames eth0, eth1, to something else, dependent upon
complicated rules. In my case eth0 has become p6p1, though many people
seem to have got longer names.
Have a look in /sys/class/net and see if your new name is there. If
so, edit all your config files containing eth0, switching to the new
name.
Once you got that done and things work again, take a deep breath and
have a look at the most recent Gentoo news item ($ eselect news read)
which
explains it all, more or less. Then decide whether the above is a long
term solution, and if not start reading docs about writing udev rules.
Yes, it's a pain in the backside. But at least with Gentoo, you've a
good chance of fixing things like this quickly.
Your help is greatly appreciated,
Nick
in my case it is still eth0:
ifconfig
eth0: flags=4163UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST mtu 1500
inet 192.168.178.21 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast
192.168.178.255
inet6 fe80::1e6f:65ff:fe87:6f6a prefixlen 64 scopeid
0x20link
ether 1c:6f:65:87:6f:6a txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
RX packets 4647305 bytes 6693078055 (6.2 GiB)
RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 2943816 bytes 226871998 (216.3 MiB)
TX errors 0 dropped 1 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
sys-fs/udev
Available versions: (~)168-r2[1] [M]171-r10 197-r8^t{tbz2}
(~)198-r6^t{tbz2} (~)199-r1^t{tbz2} 200^t{tbz2} **^t {acl
action_modeswitch build debug doc edd extras +firmware-loader floppy
gudev hwdb introspection keymap +kmod +openrc +rule_generator selinux
static-libs test}
Installed versions: 200^t{tbz2}(18:30:31
29.03.2013)(firmware-loader gudev hwdb keymap kmod openrc -acl -doc
-introspection -selinux -static-libs)
I did keep net.eth0
Is your eth0 NIC a module (modprobed), or built in the kernel?
r8169 41918 0
module
For me its built in.
- Jörg
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Oh dear what did I start!@!@! I'm sorry, I did not know this was a
machine brewing. Don't follow the mailing list all that often. I
updated 3 x86 machines with no problem but the 64 just took a crap...
I agree! Should have read the notes.
N.
On 4/6/13, Jörg Schaible joerg.schai...@gmx.de wrote:
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am 06.04.2013 21:33, schrieb Mick:
On Saturday 06 Apr 2013 20:03:15 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am 06.04.2013 17:57, schrieb Alan Mackenzie:
Hi, Nick.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:51:42AM -0400, Nick Khamis wrote:
After updating our systems we lost network connectivity to the
servers. When trying to start net.eth0 we got the following message:
/ib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is wireless command not
found /etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists command not found
Errror: Interface eth0 does not exist
Ensure that you have loaded the correct kernel modules for your
hardware
# lsmod
module used by
tg3 0
lbphytg3
eth0
flags=4098broadcast,multicast mtu 1500
interrupt=16
lo
flags=73UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING mtu 16436
inet 127.0.0.1 BROADCAST 255.255.255.0
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10 host
Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and
typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to
IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME!
No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody.
udev-200 now renames eth0, eth1, to something else, dependent
upon
complicated rules. In my case eth0 has become p6p1, though many
people
seem to have got longer names.
Have a look in /sys/class/net and see if your new name is there. If
so, edit all your config files containing eth0, switching to the new
name.
Once you got that done and things work again, take a deep breath and
have a look at the most recent Gentoo news item ($ eselect news read)
which
explains it all, more or less. Then decide whether the above is a
long
term solution, and if not start reading docs about writing udev rules.
Yes, it's a pain in the backside. But at least with Gentoo, you've a
good chance of fixing things like this quickly.
Your help is greatly appreciated,
Nick
in my case it is still eth0:
ifconfig
eth0: flags=4163UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST mtu 1500
inet 192.168.178.21 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast
192.168.178.255
inet6 fe80::1e6f:65ff:fe87:6f6a prefixlen 64 scopeid
0x20link
ether 1c:6f:65:87:6f:6a txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
RX packets 4647305 bytes 6693078055 (6.2 GiB)
RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 2943816 bytes 226871998 (216.3 MiB)
TX errors 0 dropped 1 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
sys-fs/udev
Available versions: (~)168-r2[1] [M]171-r10 197-r8^t{tbz2}
(~)198-r6^t{tbz2} (~)199-r1^t{tbz2} 200^t{tbz2} **^t {acl
action_modeswitch build debug doc edd extras +firmware-loader floppy
gudev hwdb introspection keymap +kmod +openrc +rule_generator selinux
static-libs test}
Installed versions: 200^t{tbz2}(18:30:31
29.03.2013)(firmware-loader gudev hwdb keymap kmod openrc -acl -doc
-introspection -selinux -static-libs)
I did keep net.eth0
Is your eth0 NIC a module (modprobed), or built in the kernel?
r8169 41918 0
module
For me its built in.
- Jörg
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
On 2013-04-06 1:50 PM, Jarry mr.ja...@gmail.com wrote: Well, in my case 80-net-names-slot.rules was neither empty, nor symlink to dev null, but FULL OF COMMENTS AND NOTING ELSE, Well... even I know enough to reason that 'empty' in this context means no UNcommented lines. Comments are just that, and if there are no UNcommented lines, then nothing is active, hence it is effectively 'empty'.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Our net card was also build as a module Volker, did you include
your net driver for example in /etc/conf.d/modules?
N.
On 4/6/13, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh dear what did I start!@!@! I'm sorry, I did not know this was a
machine brewing. Don't follow the mailing list all that often. I
updated 3 x86 machines with no problem but the 64 just took a crap...
I agree! Should have read the notes.
N.
On 4/6/13, Jörg Schaible joerg.schai...@gmx.de wrote:
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am 06.04.2013 21:33, schrieb Mick:
On Saturday 06 Apr 2013 20:03:15 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am 06.04.2013 17:57, schrieb Alan Mackenzie:
Hi, Nick.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:51:42AM -0400, Nick Khamis wrote:
After updating our systems we lost network connectivity to the
servers. When trying to start net.eth0 we got the following message:
/ib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is wireless command not
found /etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists command not found
Errror: Interface eth0 does not exist
Ensure that you have loaded the correct kernel modules for your
hardware
# lsmod
module used by
tg3 0
lbphytg3
eth0
flags=4098broadcast,multicast mtu 1500
interrupt=16
lo
flags=73UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING mtu 16436
inet 127.0.0.1 BROADCAST 255.255.255.0
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10 host
Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and
typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to
IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME!
No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody.
udev-200 now renames eth0, eth1, to something else, dependent
upon
complicated rules. In my case eth0 has become p6p1, though many
people
seem to have got longer names.
Have a look in /sys/class/net and see if your new name is there. If
so, edit all your config files containing eth0, switching to the new
name.
Once you got that done and things work again, take a deep breath and
have a look at the most recent Gentoo news item ($ eselect news read)
which
explains it all, more or less. Then decide whether the above is a
long
term solution, and if not start reading docs about writing udev
rules.
Yes, it's a pain in the backside. But at least with Gentoo, you've a
good chance of fixing things like this quickly.
Your help is greatly appreciated,
Nick
in my case it is still eth0:
ifconfig
eth0: flags=4163UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST mtu 1500
inet 192.168.178.21 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast
192.168.178.255
inet6 fe80::1e6f:65ff:fe87:6f6a prefixlen 64 scopeid
0x20link
ether 1c:6f:65:87:6f:6a txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
RX packets 4647305 bytes 6693078055 (6.2 GiB)
RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 2943816 bytes 226871998 (216.3 MiB)
TX errors 0 dropped 1 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
sys-fs/udev
Available versions: (~)168-r2[1] [M]171-r10 197-r8^t{tbz2}
(~)198-r6^t{tbz2} (~)199-r1^t{tbz2} 200^t{tbz2} **^t {acl
action_modeswitch build debug doc edd extras +firmware-loader floppy
gudev hwdb introspection keymap +kmod +openrc +rule_generator selinux
static-libs test}
Installed versions: 200^t{tbz2}(18:30:31
29.03.2013)(firmware-loader gudev hwdb keymap kmod openrc -acl -doc
-introspection -selinux -static-libs)
I did keep net.eth0
Is your eth0 NIC a module (modprobed), or built in the kernel?
r8169 41918 0
module
For me its built in.
- Jörg
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Am 06.04.2013 23:19, schrieb Nick Khamis: Our net card was also build as a module Volker, did you include your net driver for example in /etc/conf.d/modules? no I removed the 70-something rules, and did pretty much nothing else. /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules just exists and is full of text. And nothing changed.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Am 06.04.2013 23:28, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann: Am 06.04.2013 23:19, schrieb Nick Khamis: Our net card was also build as a module Volker, did you include your net driver for example in /etc/conf.d/modules? no I removed the 70-something rules, and did pretty much nothing else. /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules just exists and is full of text. And nothing changed. I did the same on my machines. Just removed the 70 persistent rules file. Nothing changed. I have only one machine left which I will update soon, but I suspect there also will be no problems. Some machines have the nic driver as a module, some have it built into kernel.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Well I looked into /sys/class/net as mentioned by Alan. In there I see eth0/ eth1/ lo/ and sit0/. Not sure what too look for in (e.g. eth0/). /sys/class/net/eth0/ifindex says 3. Other files look ok, for example address (contains mac address if that has not changed...). N. On 4/6/13, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 06.04.2013 23:19, schrieb Nick Khamis: Our net card was also build as a module Volker, did you include your net driver for example in /etc/conf.d/modules? no I removed the 70-something rules, and did pretty much nothing else. /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules just exists and is full of text. And nothing changed.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
In attempted to delete 70-something rules from /etc/udev/rules.d/ and it was recreated on boot with the same content. I don't think the device got renamed since ifconfig eth0 shows the correct info. Your help is greatly appreciated, N. On 4/6/13, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: Well I looked into /sys/class/net as mentioned by Alan. In there I see eth0/ eth1/ lo/ and sit0/. Not sure what too look for in (e.g. eth0/). /sys/class/net/eth0/ifindex says 3. Other files look ok, for example address (contains mac address if that has not changed...). N. On 4/6/13, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 06.04.2013 23:19, schrieb Nick Khamis: Our net card was also build as a module Volker, did you include your net driver for example in /etc/conf.d/modules? no I removed the 70-something rules, and did pretty much nothing else. /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules just exists and is full of text. And nothing changed.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 06:37:22PM +0200, J??rg Schaible wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 16:38:28 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote: Have you read the news item? Yes. I found it rather confusing. It refers to a new format for rules, but the examples use the exact same format as the old rules. Poor choice of terminology there, the format is the same only the chosen namespace is different. It talks about how 80-net-name-slot.rules needs to be either an empty file or a synmlink to /dev/null if you want to disable the new naming scheme -- but that doesn't seem to be right. After the upgrade my 80-net-name-slot.rules file was neither an empty file nor a symlink to /dev/null, but I'm still getting the same old names. Do you have a 70-persistent-net.rules file? That would override to give the old names, which is why the news item tells you to change it If the system still has old network interface renaming rules in /etc/udev/rules.d, like 70-persistent-net.rules, those will need to be either modified or removed. I don't have any rules except the 80-* one installed by new udev and I still have the old names - and this has been the case now for 3 machines and I upgrade a 4th right now. Same behavior here. Rm'd the 70- rules files from udev dir, and it's still using old device names. It explains why the file should be renamed and also why you should change the names in the rules to not use ethN. The only explanation I found was the old way is now deprecated. My bad, I thought that was covered in the news item, but it is left to one of the linked pages to explain it. - J??rg pgpYOwlwYgXa5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. N. On 4/6/13, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: In attempted to delete 70-something rules from /etc/udev/rules.d/ and it was recreated on boot with the same content. I don't think the device got renamed since ifconfig eth0 shows the correct info. Your help is greatly appreciated, N. On 4/6/13, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: Well I looked into /sys/class/net as mentioned by Alan. In there I see eth0/ eth1/ lo/ and sit0/. Not sure what too look for in (e.g. eth0/). /sys/class/net/eth0/ifindex says 3. Other files look ok, for example address (contains mac address if that has not changed...). N. On 4/6/13, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 06.04.2013 23:19, schrieb Nick Khamis: Our net card was also build as a module Volker, did you include your net driver for example in /etc/conf.d/modules? no I removed the 70-something rules, and did pretty much nothing else. /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules just exists and is full of text. And nothing changed.
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
On 07/04/13 01:10, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
'Evening, Alan.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 06:36:07PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 06/04/2013 17:57, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and
typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to
IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME!
No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody. udev-200
now renames eth0, eth1,
Please please PLEASE, for the love of god joseph mary and every other
$DEITY on the planet
STOP SPREADING THIS FUD
It did not happen to pretty much everybody. It happened to people who
blindly updated thignsd and walked away, who did not read the news
announcement, who did not read the CLEARLY WORDED wiki article at
freedesktop.org or alternatively went into mod-induced panic and started
making shit up in their heads.
Steady on, old chap! By it I was meaning the general inconvenience
all round occasioned by the changes between udev-{197,200}. Not
everybody encountered this. For example Dale, and Walt D. didn't have
to do anything. But pretty much everybody else did.
I didnt get hit either either, but (STRONG hint) ... I use eudev, so
dies Dale and I believe Walt uses mdev. Time for those in server
environments to jump ship?
It may hit us eventually, but at the moment its :)
BillK
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
The problem with eudev is that we are using the hardened profile and not sure
if it is part of our source tree. Right now, I just would like to
pinpoint this stubborn
little issue
I just wanted to mention that name did not change. ifconfig eth0 still pulls up
the interface, and same for ifconfig lo etc... /udev/rules/70-something looks
on the up and up, and same with /sys/class/eth0/1
Think the security guard outside would not appreciate having me smash
this sticky keyboard in a room full of humming servers? ;)... I'm just being
silly.
N
On 4/6/13, William Kenworthy bi...@iinet.net.au wrote:
On 07/04/13 01:10, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
'Evening, Alan.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 06:36:07PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 06/04/2013 17:57, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and
typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to
IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME!
No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody.
udev-200
now renames eth0, eth1,
Please please PLEASE, for the love of god joseph mary and every other
$DEITY on the planet
STOP SPREADING THIS FUD
It did not happen to pretty much everybody. It happened to people who
blindly updated thignsd and walked away, who did not read the news
announcement, who did not read the CLEARLY WORDED wiki article at
freedesktop.org or alternatively went into mod-induced panic and started
making shit up in their heads.
Steady on, old chap! By it I was meaning the general inconvenience
all round occasioned by the changes between udev-{197,200}. Not
everybody encountered this. For example Dale, and Walt D. didn't have
to do anything. But pretty much everybody else did.
I didnt get hit either either, but (STRONG hint) ... I use eudev, so
dies Dale and I believe Walt uses mdev. Time for those in server
environments to jump ship?
It may hit us eventually, but at the moment its :)
BillK
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
On 04/06/2013 08:53 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. /sbin/ip link addr show That will tell you the names of your interfaces, as they currently exist. You cannot reliably use 70-persistent-net-rules to assign interfaces names which the kernel may chose. This means things like 'eth0' and 'wlan0' are unreliable in principle. Once you know what the interface name will be, rename /etc/init.d/net.eth0 to /etc/init.d/net.$YOUR_INTERFACE_NAME_HERE , remove /etc/runlevels/net.eth0 and create a symlink in /etc/runlevels pointing at your new /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER file. Then /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER restart ... and things should come up, at least partially. To find anything else that might be broken: find /etc|grep eth0 find /etc -print0|xargs -0 grep eth0|egrep -v ':#' and rename 'eth0' there to your new interface name. I just went through this entire process on one of my machines...but I wiped all the files out of /etc/udev/rules.d/ and went with udev's new defaults, rather than set up my on persistent net rules for this machine. (That's a task for another day.) Frankly, the process is a PITA...and I'm going to go back to a persistent-net.rules file in the future; having to go through that entire process because of a NIC swap or an upstream behavior tweak is not something I care to have to do. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
I do not have /etc/ip however, I do have /etc/ipmaddr show: 1: lo inet6 ff02::1 2: sit0 inte6 ff02::1 3: eth0 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 4: eth1 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 Too much inte6 for my liking... Did I somehow get rid of ipv4? N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/06/2013 08:53 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. /sbin/ip link addr show That will tell you the names of your interfaces, as they currently exist. You cannot reliably use 70-persistent-net-rules to assign interfaces names which the kernel may chose. This means things like 'eth0' and 'wlan0' are unreliable in principle. Once you know what the interface name will be, rename /etc/init.d/net.eth0 to /etc/init.d/net.$YOUR_INTERFACE_NAME_HERE , remove /etc/runlevels/net.eth0 and create a symlink in /etc/runlevels pointing at your new /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER file. Then /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER restart ... and things should come up, at least partially. To find anything else that might be broken: find /etc|grep eth0 find /etc -print0|xargs -0 grep eth0|egrep -v ':#' and rename 'eth0' there to your new interface name. I just went through this entire process on one of my machines...but I wiped all the files out of /etc/udev/rules.d/ and went with udev's new defaults, rather than set up my on persistent net rules for this machine. (That's a task for another day.) Frankly, the process is a PITA...and I'm going to go back to a persistent-net.rules file in the future; having to go through that entire process because of a NIC swap or an upstream behavior tweak is not something I care to have to do.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Read the news entry - add the designated option to your grub kernel line - reboot. That will be the simplest solution for now. Long term, avoid udev upgrades like the plague and test them on non-critical systems first. Strange that the reason I think us server people were OK with udev being added to system in the first place was that it said it would ensure naming of disk and net devices didn't get mixed up (eth0 would stay eth0, eth1 would stay eth1, sdb woudl remain sdb, etc between boots). and no server should need to use anything but ethX for network namesyes, I understand the theoretical point with regard to kernel versus user space namesin real practical use though, with good hardware and bios, it never is an issue and most of the linux server software to date has expected ethX for names so the benefits versus risks of this change are not worthwhile by far, at least on the server side. On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. N. On 4/6/13, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: In attempted to delete 70-something rules from /etc/udev/rules.d/ and it was recreated on boot with the same content. I don't think the device got renamed since ifconfig eth0 shows the correct info. Your help is greatly appreciated, N. On 4/6/13, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: Well I looked into /sys/class/net as mentioned by Alan. In there I see eth0/ eth1/ lo/ and sit0/. Not sure what too look for in (e.g. eth0/). /sys/class/net/eth0/ifindex says 3. Other files look ok, for example address (contains mac address if that has not changed...). N. On 4/6/13, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 06.04.2013 23:19, schrieb Nick Khamis: Our net card was also build as a module Volker, did you include your net driver for example in /etc/conf.d/modules? no I removed the 70-something rules, and did pretty much nothing else. /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules just exists and is full of text. And nothing changed.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
/sbin/ip, not /etc/ip Those inet6 addresses beginning with ff02 are link-local addresses. Those are automatically configured on a link simply by the link being up. Something is failing to configure your interfaces' ipv4 settings. The culprit is almost certainly somewhere in one of these places, its lack of being in these places it part of your problem: /etc/conf.d/net /etc/init.d/net.* /etc/runlevels/*/net.* Otherwise, try those find/grep lines I offered. On 04/06/2013 10:01 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I do not have /etc/ip however, I do have /etc/ipmaddr show: 1: lo inet6 ff02::1 2: sit0 inte6 ff02::1 3: eth0 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 4: eth1 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 Too much inte6 for my liking... Did I somehow get rid of ipv4? N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/06/2013 08:53 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. /sbin/ip link addr show That will tell you the names of your interfaces, as they currently exist. You cannot reliably use 70-persistent-net-rules to assign interfaces names which the kernel may chose. This means things like 'eth0' and 'wlan0' are unreliable in principle. Once you know what the interface name will be, rename /etc/init.d/net.eth0 to /etc/init.d/net.$YOUR_INTERFACE_NAME_HERE , remove /etc/runlevels/net.eth0 and create a symlink in /etc/runlevels pointing at your new /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER file. Then /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER restart ... and things should come up, at least partially. To find anything else that might be broken: find /etc|grep eth0 find /etc -print0|xargs -0 grep eth0|egrep -v ':#' and rename 'eth0' there to your new interface name. I just went through this entire process on one of my machines...but I wiped all the files out of /etc/udev/rules.d/ and went with udev's new defaults, rather than set up my on persistent net rules for this machine. (That's a task for another day.) Frankly, the process is a PITA...and I'm going to go back to a persistent-net.rules file in the future; having to go through that entire process because of a NIC swap or an upstream behavior tweak is not something I care to have to do. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Sorry I did mean /sbin/ip... Long day. Regardless, /sbin/ipmaddr does now show any ipv4 related material. Other than the network card driver, what module should I ensure is loaded for ipv4 related stuff. As for /etc/conf.d/net, net.eth0/eth1 these were untouched and still point to eth0 and eth1. As for /sbin/ip. I have no such command. N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: /sbin/ip, not /etc/ip Those inet6 addresses beginning with ff02 are link-local addresses. Those are automatically configured on a link simply by the link being up. Something is failing to configure your interfaces' ipv4 settings. The culprit is almost certainly somewhere in one of these places, its lack of being in these places it part of your problem: /etc/conf.d/net /etc/init.d/net.* /etc/runlevels/*/net.* Otherwise, try those find/grep lines I offered. On 04/06/2013 10:01 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I do not have /etc/ip however, I do have /etc/ipmaddr show: 1: lo inet6 ff02::1 2: sit0 inte6 ff02::1 3: eth0 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 4: eth1 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 Too much inte6 for my liking... Did I somehow get rid of ipv4? N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/06/2013 08:53 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. /sbin/ip link addr show That will tell you the names of your interfaces, as they currently exist. You cannot reliably use 70-persistent-net-rules to assign interfaces names which the kernel may chose. This means things like 'eth0' and 'wlan0' are unreliable in principle. Once you know what the interface name will be, rename /etc/init.d/net.eth0 to /etc/init.d/net.$YOUR_INTERFACE_NAME_HERE , remove /etc/runlevels/net.eth0 and create a symlink in /etc/runlevels pointing at your new /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER file. Then /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER restart ... and things should come up, at least partially. To find anything else that might be broken: find /etc|grep eth0 find /etc -print0|xargs -0 grep eth0|egrep -v ':#' and rename 'eth0' there to your new interface name. I just went through this entire process on one of my machines...but I wiped all the files out of /etc/udev/rules.d/ and went with udev's new defaults, rather than set up my on persistent net rules for this machine. (That's a task for another day.) Frankly, the process is a PITA...and I'm going to go back to a persistent-net.rules file in the future; having to go through that entire process because of a NIC swap or an upstream behavior tweak is not something I care to have to do.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
It's probably not a module issue. Are these interfaces supposed to be DHCP-configured, or are they supposed to be statically and locally configured? If they're supposed to be configured via DHCP, try dhclient $interface_name. If they're supposed to be statically configured, try using ifconfig to configure them manually. Also, ipmaddr is *not* the command you should be using. That deals strictly in multicast addresses, not unicast addresses. I presume you're trying to get your unicast addresses working properly. ifconfig -a On 04/06/2013 10:35 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: Sorry I did mean /sbin/ip... Long day. Regardless, /sbin/ipmaddr does now show any ipv4 related material. Other than the network card driver, what module should I ensure is loaded for ipv4 related stuff. As for /etc/conf.d/net, net.eth0/eth1 these were untouched and still point to eth0 and eth1. As for /sbin/ip. I have no such command. N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: /sbin/ip, not /etc/ip Those inet6 addresses beginning with ff02 are link-local addresses. Those are automatically configured on a link simply by the link being up. Something is failing to configure your interfaces' ipv4 settings. The culprit is almost certainly somewhere in one of these places, its lack of being in these places it part of your problem: /etc/conf.d/net /etc/init.d/net.* /etc/runlevels/*/net.* Otherwise, try those find/grep lines I offered. On 04/06/2013 10:01 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I do not have /etc/ip however, I do have /etc/ipmaddr show: 1: lo inet6 ff02::1 2: sit0 inte6 ff02::1 3: eth0 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 4: eth1 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 Too much inte6 for my liking... Did I somehow get rid of ipv4? N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/06/2013 08:53 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. /sbin/ip link addr show That will tell you the names of your interfaces, as they currently exist. You cannot reliably use 70-persistent-net-rules to assign interfaces names which the kernel may chose. This means things like 'eth0' and 'wlan0' are unreliable in principle. Once you know what the interface name will be, rename /etc/init.d/net.eth0 to /etc/init.d/net.$YOUR_INTERFACE_NAME_HERE , remove /etc/runlevels/net.eth0 and create a symlink in /etc/runlevels pointing at your new /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER file. Then /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER restart ... and things should come up, at least partially. To find anything else that might be broken: find /etc|grep eth0 find /etc -print0|xargs -0 grep eth0|egrep -v ':#' and rename 'eth0' there to your new interface name. I just went through this entire process on one of my machines...but I wiped all the files out of /etc/udev/rules.d/ and went with udev's new defaults, rather than set up my on persistent net rules for this machine. (That's a task for another day.) Frankly, the process is a PITA...and I'm going to go back to a persistent-net.rules file in the future; having to go through that entire process because of a NIC swap or an upstream behavior tweak is not something I care to have to do. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
ifconfig -a and ifconfig eth0 etc.. lists the interfaces correctly. When trying to start net.eth0 the error that struck me as odd was: /lib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is_wireless: command not found /etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists: command not found Sorry I can't paste stuff directly. I am literally taking phone pics and communicating through my laptop. N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: It's probably not a module issue. Are these interfaces supposed to be DHCP-configured, or are they supposed to be statically and locally configured? If they're supposed to be configured via DHCP, try dhclient $interface_name. If they're supposed to be statically configured, try using ifconfig to configure them manually. Also, ipmaddr is *not* the command you should be using. That deals strictly in multicast addresses, not unicast addresses. I presume you're trying to get your unicast addresses working properly. ifconfig -a On 04/06/2013 10:35 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: Sorry I did mean /sbin/ip... Long day. Regardless, /sbin/ipmaddr does now show any ipv4 related material. Other than the network card driver, what module should I ensure is loaded for ipv4 related stuff. As for /etc/conf.d/net, net.eth0/eth1 these were untouched and still point to eth0 and eth1. As for /sbin/ip. I have no such command. N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: /sbin/ip, not /etc/ip Those inet6 addresses beginning with ff02 are link-local addresses. Those are automatically configured on a link simply by the link being up. Something is failing to configure your interfaces' ipv4 settings. The culprit is almost certainly somewhere in one of these places, its lack of being in these places it part of your problem: /etc/conf.d/net /etc/init.d/net.* /etc/runlevels/*/net.* Otherwise, try those find/grep lines I offered. On 04/06/2013 10:01 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I do not have /etc/ip however, I do have /etc/ipmaddr show: 1: lo inet6 ff02::1 2: sit0 inte6 ff02::1 3: eth0 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 4: eth1 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 Too much inte6 for my liking... Did I somehow get rid of ipv4? N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/06/2013 08:53 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. /sbin/ip link addr show That will tell you the names of your interfaces, as they currently exist. You cannot reliably use 70-persistent-net-rules to assign interfaces names which the kernel may chose. This means things like 'eth0' and 'wlan0' are unreliable in principle. Once you know what the interface name will be, rename /etc/init.d/net.eth0 to /etc/init.d/net.$YOUR_INTERFACE_NAME_HERE , remove /etc/runlevels/net.eth0 and create a symlink in /etc/runlevels pointing at your new /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER file. Then /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER restart ... and things should come up, at least partially. To find anything else that might be broken: find /etc|grep eth0 find /etc -print0|xargs -0 grep eth0|egrep -v ':#' and rename 'eth0' there to your new interface name. I just went through this entire process on one of my machines...but I wiped all the files out of /etc/udev/rules.d/ and went with udev's new defaults, rather than set up my on persistent net rules for this machine. (That's a task for another day.) Frankly, the process is a PITA...and I'm going to go back to a persistent-net.rules file in the future; having to go through that entire process because of a NIC swap or an upstream behavior tweak is not something I care to have to do.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 22:35:22 -0400 Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: As for /sbin/ip. I have no such command. I'd recommend installing and becoming familiar with the iproute2 package. I personally find the tools it delivers to be more intuitive than the older tools, and I *think* they are considered to obsolote some tools, such as ifconfig. -- Randy Barlow
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Can't do nothing right now, no network connection... Don't feel like burning a livecd and chrooting to jail... N. On 4/6/13, Randy Barlow ra...@electronsweatshop.com wrote: On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 22:35:22 -0400 Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: As for /sbin/ip. I have no such command. I'd recommend installing and becoming familiar with the iproute2 package. I personally find the tools it delivers to be more intuitive than the older tools, and I *think* they are considered to obsolote some tools, such as ifconfig. -- Randy Barlow
[gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On 2013-04-06, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Ahhh... I think now I understand... So. Here's my summarization of the situation: * The ethX naming can change, i.e., the interfaces can get out of order * So, to fix this, udev decided to use the physical attachment points of the NIC in driving a persistent name, a name that will be identical across boots as long as there is no hardware change * In doing so, it also frees the 'traditional' ethX names to be used * If one wants, one can still 'rename' the NICs to the 'traditional' names using the 70-*.rules script Wha? I swear I was told that you could not reliably name the iterfaces eth[0-n] using udev rules (which is what I've always done without problems) because of race conditions. So I changed over to net[0-n] on one machine, and was planning on doing so on the others soon. Can we still use udev rules to name interfaces eth[0-n] or not? -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! I've got an IDEA!! at Why don't I STARE at you gmail.comso HARD, you forget your SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER!!
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev
On 6 April 2013, at 16:57, Alan Mackenzie wrote: ... Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME! No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody. udev-200 now renames eth0, eth1, to something else, dependent upon complicated rules. In my case eth0 has become p6p1, though many people seem to have got longer names. ... Yes, it's a pain in the backside. The irony of it is that AIUI these changes were occasioned because the kernel devs refused to make changes which might renumber the network ports for a very small number of users (who were running, at the time, the very latest generation of Dell or HP servers, less than 6 months old). I believe Linus himself was involved and he said no, no, no! we cannot make changes which will break things! Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
The problem is that the definition of 'correctly' has changed. I don't know if this is 'correctly' from your perspective of 'this is how I'm used to seeing it' or 'correctly' from any of the three or more ways one could use udev. The various defintions of 'correctly' may not overlap. If they're showing up as eth0/eth1...why? Is it because you disabled udev's renaming entirely via the kernel command-line parameter? Because you've done some magic in /etc/udev/rules.d/? If the former, then OK, this is a different issue. If the latter, be aware that this isn't a supported configuration! You may very well have to rename your interfaces before this is done, or let udev rename them for you. On 04/06/2013 10:55 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: ifconfig -a and ifconfig eth0 etc.. lists the interfaces correctly. When trying to start net.eth0 the error that struck me as odd was: /lib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is_wireless: command not found /etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists: command not found Sorry I can't paste stuff directly. I am literally taking phone pics and communicating through my laptop. N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: It's probably not a module issue. Are these interfaces supposed to be DHCP-configured, or are they supposed to be statically and locally configured? If they're supposed to be configured via DHCP, try dhclient $interface_name. If they're supposed to be statically configured, try using ifconfig to configure them manually. Also, ipmaddr is *not* the command you should be using. That deals strictly in multicast addresses, not unicast addresses. I presume you're trying to get your unicast addresses working properly. ifconfig -a On 04/06/2013 10:35 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: Sorry I did mean /sbin/ip... Long day. Regardless, /sbin/ipmaddr does now show any ipv4 related material. Other than the network card driver, what module should I ensure is loaded for ipv4 related stuff. As for /etc/conf.d/net, net.eth0/eth1 these were untouched and still point to eth0 and eth1. As for /sbin/ip. I have no such command. N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: /sbin/ip, not /etc/ip Those inet6 addresses beginning with ff02 are link-local addresses. Those are automatically configured on a link simply by the link being up. Something is failing to configure your interfaces' ipv4 settings. The culprit is almost certainly somewhere in one of these places, its lack of being in these places it part of your problem: /etc/conf.d/net /etc/init.d/net.* /etc/runlevels/*/net.* Otherwise, try those find/grep lines I offered. On 04/06/2013 10:01 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I do not have /etc/ip however, I do have /etc/ipmaddr show: 1: lo inet6 ff02::1 2: sit0 inte6 ff02::1 3: eth0 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 4: eth1 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 Too much inte6 for my liking... Did I somehow get rid of ipv4? N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/06/2013 08:53 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. /sbin/ip link addr show That will tell you the names of your interfaces, as they currently exist. You cannot reliably use 70-persistent-net-rules to assign interfaces names which the kernel may chose. This means things like 'eth0' and 'wlan0' are unreliable in principle. Once you know what the interface name will be, rename /etc/init.d/net.eth0 to /etc/init.d/net.$YOUR_INTERFACE_NAME_HERE , remove /etc/runlevels/net.eth0 and create a symlink in /etc/runlevels pointing at your new /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER file. Then /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER restart ... and things should come up, at least partially. To find anything else that might be broken: find /etc|grep eth0 find /etc -print0|xargs -0 grep eth0|egrep -v ':#' and rename 'eth0' there to your new interface name. I just went through this entire process on one of my machines...but I wiped all the files out of /etc/udev/rules.d/ and went with udev's new defaults, rather than set up my on persistent net rules for this machine. (That's a task for another day.) Frankly, the process is a PITA...and I'm going to go back to a persistent-net.rules file in the future; having to go through that entire process because of a NIC swap or an upstream behavior tweak is not something I care to have to do. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
Hello Michael, Is it because you disabled udev's renaming entirely via the kernel command-line parameter? Because you've done some magic in /etc/udev/rules.d/? I did not change 70-something contents. I deleted it and let udev regenerate it. The name in rules.d is net=eth0 and net=eth1 pointing to the correct mac address. Your help is greatly appreciated, N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: The problem is that the definition of 'correctly' has changed. I don't know if this is 'correctly' from your perspective of 'this is how I'm used to seeing it' or 'correctly' from any of the three or more ways one could use udev. The various defintions of 'correctly' may not overlap. If they're showing up as eth0/eth1...why? Is it because you disabled udev's renaming entirely via the kernel command-line parameter? Because you've done some magic in /etc/udev/rules.d/? If the former, then OK, this is a different issue. If the latter, be aware that this isn't a supported configuration! You may very well have to rename your interfaces before this is done, or let udev rename them for you. On 04/06/2013 10:55 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: ifconfig -a and ifconfig eth0 etc.. lists the interfaces correctly. When trying to start net.eth0 the error that struck me as odd was: /lib64/rc/net/wpa_supplicant.sh: line 68: _is_wireless: command not found /etc/init.d/net.eth0: line 548: _exists: command not found Sorry I can't paste stuff directly. I am literally taking phone pics and communicating through my laptop. N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: It's probably not a module issue. Are these interfaces supposed to be DHCP-configured, or are they supposed to be statically and locally configured? If they're supposed to be configured via DHCP, try dhclient $interface_name. If they're supposed to be statically configured, try using ifconfig to configure them manually. Also, ipmaddr is *not* the command you should be using. That deals strictly in multicast addresses, not unicast addresses. I presume you're trying to get your unicast addresses working properly. ifconfig -a On 04/06/2013 10:35 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: Sorry I did mean /sbin/ip... Long day. Regardless, /sbin/ipmaddr does now show any ipv4 related material. Other than the network card driver, what module should I ensure is loaded for ipv4 related stuff. As for /etc/conf.d/net, net.eth0/eth1 these were untouched and still point to eth0 and eth1. As for /sbin/ip. I have no such command. N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: /sbin/ip, not /etc/ip Those inet6 addresses beginning with ff02 are link-local addresses. Those are automatically configured on a link simply by the link being up. Something is failing to configure your interfaces' ipv4 settings. The culprit is almost certainly somewhere in one of these places, its lack of being in these places it part of your problem: /etc/conf.d/net /etc/init.d/net.* /etc/runlevels/*/net.* Otherwise, try those find/grep lines I offered. On 04/06/2013 10:01 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I do not have /etc/ip however, I do have /etc/ipmaddr show: 1: lo inet6 ff02::1 2: sit0 inte6 ff02::1 3: eth0 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 4: eth1 link 33:33:00:00:00:01 inet6 ff02:1 Too much inte6 for my liking... Did I somehow get rid of ipv4? N. On 4/6/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/06/2013 08:53 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: I took a closer look at /etc/udev/70-something-rules-net and /sys/class/net/eth0/ and all the ATTR (i.e., address, type, dev_id) line up fine. I did not find a name file in /sys/class/net/eth0 however, name=eth0 in etc/udev/70-something-rules-net. Ifconfig alone returns nothing. Ifconfig eth0/1 and lo returns the interface with no tx and rx traffic. And no ip address as set in conf.d/net. Please help guys. Server room is numbing.. /sbin/ip link addr show That will tell you the names of your interfaces, as they currently exist. You cannot reliably use 70-persistent-net-rules to assign interfaces names which the kernel may chose. This means things like 'eth0' and 'wlan0' are unreliable in principle. Once you know what the interface name will be, rename /etc/init.d/net.eth0 to /etc/init.d/net.$YOUR_INTERFACE_NAME_HERE , remove /etc/runlevels/net.eth0 and create a symlink in /etc/runlevels pointing at your new /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER file. Then /etc/init.d/net.$WHATEVER restart ... and things should come up, at least partially. To find anything else that might be broken: find /etc|grep eth0 find /etc -print0|xargs -0 grep eth0|egrep -v ':#' and rename 'eth0' there to your new interface name. I just went through this entire process on one of my machines...but I wiped all the files out of /etc/udev/rules.d/ and went with udev's new defaults, rather than set up my on persistent net rules for this machine. (That's a task for
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eth0 interface not found - udev that little slut!!!!!
On 04/06/2013 11:19 PM, Nick Khamis wrote: Hello Michael, Is it because you disabled udev's renaming entirely via the kernel command-line parameter? Because you've done some magic in /etc/udev/rules.d/? I did not change 70-something contents. I deleted it and let udev regenerate it. The name in rules.d is net=eth0 and net=eth1 pointing to the correct mac address. Your help is greatly appreciated, Just an FYI...when I removed them, udev did not regenerate them. You might try removing them again (or moving them to ~root/ for safekeeping), rebooting, and seeing what happens. That udev regenerated them for you is very, very weird. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On 04/06/2013 11:06 PM, Grant Edwards wrote: On 2013-04-06, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Ahhh... I think now I understand... So. Here's my summarization of the situation: * The ethX naming can change, i.e., the interfaces can get out of order * So, to fix this, udev decided to use the physical attachment points of the NIC in driving a persistent name, a name that will be identical across boots as long as there is no hardware change * In doing so, it also frees the 'traditional' ethX names to be used * If one wants, one can still 'rename' the NICs to the 'traditional' names using the 70-*.rules script Wha? I swear I was told that you could not reliably name the iterfaces eth[0-n] using udev rules (which is what I've always done without problems) because of race conditions. So I changed over to net[0-n] on one machine, and was planning on doing so on the others soon. Can we still use udev rules to name interfaces eth[0-n] or not? If and only if there is no device named ethN when you go to name a device ethN. That's what's meant by 'reliably'. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 09:46:13PM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote Ah, thanks for the clarification! :-) So, from now on, for safety I'm going to use a custom naming scheme, like lan[0-9]+ or wan[0-9]+ or wifi[0-9]+, anything that won't collide with kernel names of eth[0-9]+ Now I only had to figure out how to rename eth[0-9]+ to the custom naming scheme when using mdev. ***UDEV*** has broken using eth[0-9]. mdev works just fine, thank you. -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] Eth0 interface not found - udev
On 04/07/13 04:06, Stroller wrote: On 6 April 2013, at 16:57, Alan Mackenzie wrote: ... Please excuse me, I am running back and forth from the servers and typing the error message here. Did our configuration get switched to IP6? These are our DB servers and why me!!! Why ME! No, it's not just you, it's happened to pretty much everybody. udev-200 now renames eth0, eth1, to something else, dependent upon complicated rules. In my case eth0 has become p6p1, though many people seem to have got longer names. ... Yes, it's a pain in the backside. The irony of it is that AIUI these changes were occasioned because the kernel devs refused to make changes which might renumber the network ports for a very small number of users (who were running, at the time, the very latest generation of Dell or HP servers, less than 6 months old). I believe Linus himself was involved and he said no, no, no! we cannot make changes which will break things! Stroller. Are these new udev rules going across all Linux distros or this is something specific to Gentoo? -- Joseph
