From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAC971384B4 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E95A921C014; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:19:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-1.ca.inter.net (mail-1.ca.inter.net [208.85.220.69]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09BFB21C002 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:19:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (offload-3.ca.inter.net [208.85.220.70]) by mail-1.ca.inter.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79E692EA074 for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 23:19:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail-1.ca.inter.net ([208.85.220.69]) by localhost (offload-3.ca.inter.net [208.85.220.70]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wlAevykb1k5A for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 23:19:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ca.inter.net (host-192.252-162-83.dyn.295.ca [192.252.162.83]) by mail-1.ca.inter.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 249EB2EAD40 for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 23:19:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by ca.inter.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 19 Dec 2015 23:19:13 -0500 Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 23:19:13 -0500 From: Philip Webb To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [SOLVED] no network "eth0" after upgrade. Message-ID: <20151220041913.GD1245@ca.inter.net> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <5675ABC2.3030007@sys-concept.com> <5675AEE7.8030606@sys-concept.com> <5675C53A.1070909@sys-concept.com> <20151219230231.31214267@digimed.co.uk> <20151220000254.GA1245@ca.inter.net> <20151220005641.7e442b0d@digimed.co.uk> <567608E5.8020704@sys-concept.com> 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=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <567608E5.8020704@sys-concept.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Archives-Salt: 56c0e8f5-f52e-44bd-a4d9-7f7cf7ec71cf X-Archives-Hash: 74c2a90e489aba221492a39c5f8b5319 151219 thelma@sys-concept.com wrote: > On 12/19/2015 05:56 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: >> On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 19:02:54 -0500, Philip Webb wrote: Thelma> none /proc/bus/usb usbfs defaults,devmode=0666 0 0 > none /proc proc > defaults 0 0 Neil> You're trying to mount /proc/bus/usb before mounting /proc. > Systemd takes care of such things, > but with Openrc local mounts are mounted in the order they appear in > fstab. Try switching the lines. Philip> That looks like the explanation to me : has Thelma tried this ? Neil> Looking at it again, I don't think either of those entries > should be in fstab, certainly not the /proc one. Thelma> Good hint, thank you. I've removed both lines from fstab: > and the system booted normally with openrc-0.18.4 > Question, why isn't 'none /proc proc defaults 0 0' needed anymore ? > All my other systems have this line in fstab. My own Fstab has long had these lines : # NB The next line is critical for boot! none /proc proc defaults 0 0 When did this change & why ? Does anyone know ? -- ========================,,============================================ SUPPORT ___________//___, Philip Webb ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto TRANSIT `-O----------O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca