From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KIQwN-0003m4-Kv for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:30:19 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9ADFEE0628; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:30:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.240]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7416CE0628 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:30:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c28so951884ana.47 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:30:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; bh=zcl1NJeXKnqVDbtaIDktRUEAdpxgZod5G1bJ/Zr49Rs=; b=Ij6RXCedTc0gtyV2hse2dxAdCSEHS2VZ0cFuUiVDggrFN6lv8Hf4oFiz+MwNzW+X6a 2YCJypUuYMu4bbiwFWTi7wNtJBbqpWQI4SM+dP0JQ/AAz4XX/KTk3A5W2AJCu146g5Du kvqifBO0iOA3KMMQKceBN3mHWq5Nc1HIwDGYg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :message-id; b=GPmePHduntawm/Eetd+f3105zVKkGSPFpMHd7yxp/yRpskDDBv8oAbY+r6GGSLjXxK ScL8fcOxVHKjthERU49lwq3Ayk7tXZW9c10NwyNRHZs8i2yT3OK/UKt/7aDycSkqx8aC 2SOzYFeUBRSYimzFVDCrMvyDUmGRCOpr/b2e0= Received: by 10.100.47.13 with SMTP id u13mr10289584anu.56.1216052987703; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:29:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?10.0.0.3? ( [41.243.208.33]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h12sm5118716wxd.31.2008.07.14.09.29.45 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:29:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Network chip always comes up eth1 on 1-year-old Dell Inspiron 530 Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:30:57 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <20080709032122.GD5379@waltdnes.org> <20080714094321.7c92ee0b@ilievnet.com> <20080714112554.793bd9cf@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20080714112554.793bd9cf@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200807141830.57335.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 806860b9-9f3e-42b6-97ef-9c8a6354d6fd X-Archives-Hash: 317fbc8ebbcc8db65dd438046af522e4 On Monday 14 July 2008, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:43:21 +0300, Daniel Iliev wrote: > > > It's hardly new, it's been around for some years. It is helpful > > > if you have two NICs because it means they are named > > > consistently, which is better than having your private network > > > connected to the Internet because the kernel decided to load the > > > modules in a different order. > > > > 1) You can explicitly tell the kernel the order in which load the > > modules > > And if the module for eth0 fails to load, the other card becomes eth0 > instead of eth1. Using udev rules, the second card is always eth1, > whatever happens elsewhere in the system. Consider this: if we could have assigned arbitrary names to interfaces since day one, we would have the exact same behaviour udev gives, everyone would agree this is a truly excellent thing and this thread would not exist. The single minor difference is that you can't call the interface whatever you want directly, it just gets named the equally arbitrary name of "eth1" -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list