Thanks James (x2)! Even if it is Rhel 6.x creating this weird interface name (eth0-eth2) and leaving only a eth0 file in network-scripts, it would be really good if cobbler could fix this.
Thanks, Daniel Ps. If someone looks for a fix, I can test and validate it. On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:05 PM, James Cammarata <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:56 AM, James Clendenan > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Daniel, > > > > Hm, that's different. > > > > I do however know that Dell and Redhat have been working on some methods > of > > using DMI / smbios labeling to keep the port names on the back of the > system > > the same as the system's actual ethernet ports. I've got more than a > couple > > boxes where this caused a bit of head scratching. > > > > More info here: > > > http://en.community.dell.com/dell-blogs/enterprise/b/tech-center/archive/2011/05/26/meaningful-names-for-network-devices-in-rhel-6-sp1-on-dell-systems.aspx > > > > Hope this helps. or at least doesn't confuse the issue. > > Yeah, RHEL6 changed the naming scheme up. For instance, I was testing > some 10gbps NICs on RHEL6.1 and they ended up being named p1p1 and > p1p2... So what may be happening is you're naming the interface eth0, > but really the system thinks it's eth2, so it's creating a compromised > name. Just a guess, but it's all I can think of. Like James pointed > out above, it's definitely RHEL6 doing it and not cobbler. > _______________________________________________ > cobbler mailing list > [email protected] > https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler >
_______________________________________________ cobbler mailing list [email protected] https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler
