Re: is it a backwards compatability catch-22?

2006-04-25 Thread Jesse Brandeburg
On 4/24/06, Rick Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The udev stuff runs after the device has already chosen it's default name. It has to, it's part of the hotplug infrastructure, and we don't want to depend on usermode to define the name. Just choose some other convention eth_0 or something

Re: is it a backwards compatability catch-22?

2006-04-25 Thread Rick Jones
Jesse Brandeburg wrote: On 4/24/06, Rick Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The udev stuff runs after the device has already chosen it's default name. It has to, it's part of the hotplug infrastructure, and we don't want to depend on usermode to define the name. Just choose some other convention

Re: is it a backwards compatability catch-22?

2006-04-25 Thread Michal Schmidt
Rick Jones wrote: lumber:~# cat /etc/udev/rules.d/010_netinterfaces.rules KERNEL=eth*,SYSFS{address}==00:30:6e:4c:27:3c, NAME=eth0 KERNEL=eth*,SYSFS{address}==00:30:6e:4c:27:3d, NAME=eth1 KERNEL=eth*,SYSFS{address}==00:12:79:9e:0e:d2, NAME=eth2 KERNEL=eth*,SYSFS{address}==00:12:79:9e:0e:d3,

is it a backwards compatability catch-22?

2006-04-24 Thread Rick Jones
I might be out to lunch, certainly it happens often enough :) I've spent the afternoon trying to stop my NIC names from being random on each boot. To that end, I've been doing udev rules based on an example I found at http://www.debianhelp.co.uk/udev.htm In this case I'm running a Debian

Re: is it a backwards compatability catch-22?

2006-04-24 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:47:34 -0700 Rick Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I might be out to lunch, certainly it happens often enough :) I've spent the afternoon trying to stop my NIC names from being random on each boot. To that end, I've been doing udev rules based on an example I found at

Re: is it a backwards compatability catch-22?

2006-04-24 Thread Rick Jones
The udev stuff runs after the device has already chosen it's default name. It has to, it's part of the hotplug infrastructure, and we don't want to depend on usermode to define the name. Just choose some other convention eth_0 or something like that. Is that because adding another NIC at a