[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster)

The Wanderer wrote:
On 2019-07-02 at 10:10, Curt wrote:

On 2019-07-02, The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> wrote:

Not even that, it seems (no longer affects systemd).

Have you confirmed that? It seems possible that on a systemd
machine, things in other packages (such as whatever would provide
that 99-default.link file, which unfortunately - because it's under
/etc/ - can't be easily found through 'apt-file search') might
still be overriding 70-persistent-net.rules, even with this change


Let's revert, and start with a clean slate. This fixes #11436.

(#11436 being 'network interface is renamed although NAME has been
set by udev rule'.)

Yeah, I read that, although I didn't read #11436.

Maybe I'm not understanding this (quite possible).

I think you're reading it the same way I am. I'm just questioning
whether what we're seeing here represents the whole picture, and partly
also whether this is the latest word on the subject.

It might be interesting to know when that section of the release notes
was last modified, relative to when this change was made.

Somebody on an up-to-date Buster could perform Michael Biebl's bug
reproduction test:

In particular, someone on a machine running full-on systemd. My
available machines are either non-systemd or not systemd-as-init, so my
observed results aren't applicable.

I'm running up to date sid and using systemd and still have an eth0 as set by 70-persistent-net.rules.


Reply to: