| 1 |
On 06-Apr-13 19:10, Alan Mackenzie wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
>> STOP SPREADING THIS FUD |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> It did not happen to pretty much everybody. It happened to people who |
| 6 |
>> blindly updated thignsd and walked away, who did not read the news |
| 7 |
>> announcement, who did not read the CLEARLY WORDED wiki article at |
| 8 |
>> freedesktop.org or alternatively went into mod-induced panic and started |
| 9 |
>> making shit up in their heads. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Steady on, old chap! By "it" I was meaning the general inconvenience |
| 12 |
> all round occasioned by the changes between udev-{197,200}. Not |
| 13 |
> everybody encountered this. For example Dale, and Walt D. didn't have |
| 14 |
> to do anything. But pretty much everybody else did. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The problem is, news item is not correct! I followed it |
| 17 |
and yet finished with server having old network name (eth0). |
| 18 |
Problem was the point 4. in news item, which is not quite clear: |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
----- |
| 21 |
4. predictable network interface names: |
| 22 |
If /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules is an empty file |
| 23 |
or a symlink to /dev/null, the new names will be disabled and |
| 24 |
the kernel will do all the interface naming... |
| 25 |
----- |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Well, in my case 80-net-names-slot.rules was neither empty, |
| 28 |
nor symlink to dev null, but FULL OF COMMENTS AND NOTING ELSE, |
| 29 |
which basically did the same thing as empty file: disabled |
| 30 |
new network names. Unfortunatelly, I found it just after |
| 31 |
screwed reboot. But I did everything I found in news item: |
| 32 |
checked and verified that file was not symlink to /dev/null |
| 33 |
and that it was not empty (1667 bytes does not seem to me |
| 34 |
to be empty file). |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
As I wrote previously, I am pretty sure I never created this |
| 37 |
file manually so it must have been created by som previous |
| 38 |
udev-version. So I finished up with similar problem as OP: |
| 39 |
after rebooting I did not find interface I expected. The |
| 40 |
only difference is I expected already interface with new |
| 41 |
name, and OP is probably the old one... |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
So I must add my point to complaining about news item |
| 44 |
not beeing quite clear. And this happens quite often... |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Jarry |
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
_______________________________________________________________ |
| 49 |
This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists! |
| 50 |
Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted. |
Archives