Brian,
From: bri...@aracnet.com
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 19:39:14 -0700
... tacked the new eth onto the end, so eth0 ended up being renamed eth3.
The old Ethernet device remained in the rules file with the name eth0 and
the new device was assigned the name eth3? So the new device was just
On 04/01/2011 12:18 PM, peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
[snip]
Names such as eth0 and eth0.absent still do not solve the problem of identifying
external hot swappable devices. Plug in three Linksys USB adapters yielding
eth3, eth4 and eth5. Which eth is which? Meaningful names work.
For example
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:23 PM, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
I mean really, why does the system still do stupid sh*t like this.
renamed network interface eth0 to eth3
Why oh why ! It was already eth0, what possible reason could it have
to go rename it.
oh and by the way, just to be
On Thursday 31 March 2011, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
I mean really, why does the system still do stupid sh*t like this.
renamed network interface eth0 to eth3
Why oh why ! It was already eth0, what possible reason could it have
to go rename it.
oh and by the way, just to be maximally
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 04:37:57 -0400 (EDT), David Goodenough wrote:
have a look at /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules. This file
tries to make sure that network adapters are always named in the same
way in whatever order they are started. The problem comes when you replace a
network
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 07:00:05 -0400 (EDT)
Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 04:37:57 -0400 (EDT), David Goodenough wrote:
have a look at /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules. This file
tries to make sure that network adapters are always named in the
same
From: bri...@aracnet.com
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 07:34:32 -0700
It seems to me that this is a really ugly user trap, even if it's a
trap you get into replacing the old motherboard.
In the Linux world, udev is really a beautiful way of handling
contemporary peripheral devices. eth0, eth1
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 10:34:32 -0400 (EDT), bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
Thanks to everyone who responded !
That explains everything. I changed motherboards out from under the
system. So it appended the new eth to the old ones.
It seems to me that this is a really ugly user trap, even if
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:32:18 -0800
peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
From: bri...@aracnet.com
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 07:34:32 -0700
It seems to me that this is a really ugly user trap, even if it's a
trap you get into replacing the old motherboard.
In the Linux world, udev is really a beautiful
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 20:06:51 -0400 (EDT)
Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 10:34:32 -0400 (EDT), bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
Thanks to everyone who responded !
That explains everything. I changed motherboards out from under the
system. So it appended the
I mean really, why does the system still do stupid sh*t like this.
renamed network interface eth0 to eth3
Why oh why ! It was already eth0, what possible reason could it have
to go rename it.
oh and by the way, just to be maximally annoying, it most certainly
decieds to name it something
11 matches
Mail list logo
