From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-146514-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE791381F3
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 18:41:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 58AA3E0985;
Fri, 5 Apr 2013 18:41:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-oa0-f46.google.com (mail-oa0-f46.google.com [209.85.219.46])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D992CE097C
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 18:41:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id k1so4313929oag.5
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 11:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=x-received:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to
:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition
:in-reply-to:user-agent;
bh=Oc84SE3XcFUdSgdmGlCnR8CrDSTRWJUVzSw1N3a3qlE=;
b=vjCg8/9E3ejZZqHTXsxvGQCWz3rPY/1XbO11bOeQ8P7jUQrWUAfERfzPqFn1Uuyzeh
Zxo9Nz8+3/NteChrtGza7tgzOhYr6951wiXks0g88B9xe+/zCQAaepLnyfSVCMeWm4Pd
bhM+czyePBnd+zydlPETNPjJWiVJTPQBb9uiRqvO7VwXVQtA/zKU+RF/HQrU7JZmWL1I
6o8Q3vaS+u4waCFkDRcoPUZMrKfd0YujmO34TY12WbG/PneVTDyGMrHc65fm4dlcEIGv
wWKimFSq1DHqiG2HIBAgs5yDLwdczC79obbe8ZX1YQgA+KRnEKPj8166LNy/tWiR/jc/
oQPQ==
X-Received: by 10.60.135.103 with SMTP id pr7mr7859906oeb.142.1365187293072;
Fri, 05 Apr 2013 11:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-91-128.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.91.128])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a3sm13306242oee.8.2013.04.05.11.41.29
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Fri, 05 Apr 2013 11:41:31 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com>
Received: by linux1 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 05 Apr 2013 13:41:28 -0500
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 13:41:28 -0500
From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes
Message-ID: <20130405184128.GA3820@linux1>
Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
References: <20130401192628.GA3717@linux1>
<5159E551.4050609@gmail.com>
<201304020100.25920.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org>
<CAEH5T2PTjSx7Gd_y4g03vvqwFKFgNxia2t7ai5uG0Km=DPfEbg@mail.gmail.com>
<515B2FAE.20607@gmail.com>
<kjjcha$eod$2@ger.gmane.org>
<515D442A.1090209@gmail.com>
<515D7AF4.5020104@libertytrek.org>
<20130405161759.GA3456@linux1>
<515F0AA7.808@libertytrek.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jRHKVT23PllUwdXP"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <515F0AA7.808@libertytrek.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Archives-Salt: 1598c94e-95b2-4034-9cab-82e76935e4dc
X-Archives-Hash: 4c3ad1804f3cce633e761f490ba4f70a
--jRHKVT23PllUwdXP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:32:23PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> But what confuses me about that linked page is that from what I've heard=
=20
> from others here, option 1 - which is the option I think I'd prefer -=20
> requires more than just symlinking 80-net-name-slot.rules to=20
> /dev/null...? Apparently you should also create your own=20
> 70-my-net-names.rules - but I've heard many people claim they used ethX=
=20
> names instead of netX names, so... again... should I just rename my file=
=20
> to 70-my-net-names.rules and leave the contents alone?
symlinking /etc/udev/rules.d/80-net-name-slot.rules to /dev/null does
the same thing as adding net.ifnames=3D0 to your kernel command line, so
choose one or the other of these.
Neither of these is needed if you want to have your own names,
because naming the interfaces yourself in /etc/uev/70-net-names.rules or
whatever you call the file overrides udev's predictable names.
If people are using ethx names and getting away with it it is probably
because they are loading the drivers as modules, or by chance the kernel
is initializing the cards in the order they expect. There is no
guarantee that will stay consistent.
I recommend using netx names.
Does that clear it up?
William
--jRHKVT23PllUwdXP
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlFfGtgACgkQblQW9DDEZThSDACgnxbwmbt64z8FwdPCgJ4ng3w2
ivYAnizEXf6BvmW+uuF0VW+2K9u31GJY
=OAQl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--jRHKVT23PllUwdXP--