| 1 |
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 02:20:21PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> FWIW, I had a /dev/cdrom symlink long before *devfs* even existed, let |
| 4 |
> alone udev. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
We are not looking for device paths that existed berfore udev. Actually, |
| 7 |
most of them exist since much more time than udev. It's not relevant at |
| 8 |
all. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> Also, ethN numberings are generally stable until and unless you do |
| 11 |
> some strange BIOS tweaking or hardware changes, and should be able to |
| 12 |
> be stabilized in the event the instability comes from some racy module |
| 13 |
> loading mechanism. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
This is not true. I've had computers in hands where network cards could |
| 16 |
change of names without any BIOS tunning. BIOS is a executed program and |
| 17 |
the way each is implemented can guarantee *or not* to have the |
| 18 |
conditions for persistent NIC names on Linux. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> udev's attempts at stabilizing network interfaces have made things |
| 21 |
> worse more often than I've heard of it making them better. Hit any |
| 22 |
> search engine for "eth0 missing 70-persistent-net.rules". |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
It's fully expected and required. Persistent naming can work if you have |
| 25 |
a configuration for that somewhere. I see nothing worse here. But I see |
| 26 |
an improvement to let me tune the NIC names if I need to. I have routers |
| 27 |
with *lot of* NIC cards where this feature is very usefull (expressive |
| 28 |
names are much better than ethX). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> (Apologies for anyone who sees this message in such a result; just |
| 31 |
> delete /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules, and you should get |
| 32 |
> eth0 back.) |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
<still quoting to help beginners> |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Nicolas Sebrecht |
Archives