Hi Marco On 2/12/07, Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it> wrote:
On Feb 12, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> > No, wait... When a new network interface is added it will get the next > > available name, this is a supported configuration. > Ok, so this is true when the built-in device is loaded first at boot time > and is initially assigned eth0, there is no rule saying to rename it, and > there is a rule saying to rename another interface to eth0? If there is already a rule to rename some other device to eth0 then the current eth0 will be renamed to the first free name and a new rule will be created for it.
Will udev add this new rule to /etc/udev/rules.d/z25_persistent-net.rules ? Since no new rules are being added on my test system, does this tells whether something like DRIVERS=="?*" is matching or not ? It seems that the real question is what sequence of events causes an interface to be named eth1_rename, as opposed to the next available interface name (e.g. eth1). I'll see if I can figure this out from the code. Gordon -- Gordon Farquharson