On Tue,09.Feb.10, 23:06:08, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > Andrei Popescu put forth on 2/9/2010 3:37 AM: > > On Mon,08.Feb.10, 16:33:39, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > > > >> So, are you saying it didn't happen? Couldn't have happened? Shouldn't have > >> happened? I'm imagining things? Are you kidding? > > > > No, I'm saying that under normal circumstances it should work. > > I don't recall the exact circumstances. Do you recall the time frame? The first mention of the persistent-net-generator.rules in changelog.Debian.gz is from 21 Apr 2006. That means etch was the first stable release to include it. > I don't know anything about these scripts. When do they run? And are they > supposed to pin a mac addr to eth* name? That obviously didn't work if that's > the case. Both these NICs have hard MAC addresses, as is required by the 802 > standard for any add-in ethernet card. It seems clear that the cause of the > UDEV device naming problem was me swapping cards around. Yes, the rule is supposed to pin by MAC. There were some issues with built-in nvidia adapters which had a different MAC on each reboot (some firmware bug, but I might be wrong) > > Since your bug is quite unique (or at least no reports here on d-u) I > > doubt it's good advice to tell someone having troubles with networking > > to edit udev rules, especially since the OP mentioned the interface > > names were ok and consistent. > > The mere existence of this Debian doc (and others) suggests that this UDEV > eth0/eth1/etc naming problem is fairly common. Common enough for people to take > the time to write a lengthy help document. > http://www.debianhelp.co.uk/udev.htm I can't find a date on that document. > This was a pretty lengthy thread, many suggestions were made, and I was not the > only one looking at udev device naming as potentially part of the OP's problem, > yet you singled me out....hmm. I find it interesting that you single me out for > this, given that in one post I firmly identified the root cause of the OP's > problem, and recommended a solution, whilst telling the OP to come back and look > at udev _only_ if he had device naming issues _after_ the root problem was solved. Sorry if it looked like that. It was not my intention. > Are you a UDEV developer or maintainer by chance Andrei? Nope > Did my statement below > "I hate UDEV for this" strike a nerve and prompt your entry into this thread? > If so please accept my apologies. I was merely stating _my_ perspective on my > experience with my udev issue, not making any blanket statement about the > quality of UDEV. I save that kind of remark for later, in the event I have > problems with UDEV in the future. ;) Udev has created (and probably will still create) a lot of problems, no doubt about it. > Note how little text I devote to UDEV below, but how much I devote to the > firmware issue which I correctly identified as the root cause of the OP's > problem? I think your jumping on my UDEV comments is unjustified given the > facts in the thread. I merely tried to point out that the naming issues are a thing of the past (not counting hidden bugs). Please accept my apologies if I offended you in any way. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature