On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 20:31:10 +0000 (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote: > In Flameyes blog, he showed an example of using udev rules pretty much > identical to the ones I already had, so I couldn't figure out what was > different (other than the default interface names, which still aren't > really predictable).
They are totally predictable, since the names are specified in the rules, so you can predict what the interface will be called, it's what the rules file says it will be called. However, the important issue is persistence, whatever name an interface has is the name it will always have. The rules renaming within the kernel namespace, eth, wlan etc, could not guarantee that because of race conditions, and the so-called persistent names from the new udev still cannot do the same for devices that can be physically moved (mainly USB). The simplest solution is to do what the news item suggests, rename the persistent-net rules file and rename the interfaces within it to not clash with the kernel. That's all you need to worry about when going from 197 to 200, upgrading from earlier versions means you should act on the parts about DEVTMPFS and runlevel files. -- Neil Bothwick Am I ignorant or apathetic? I don't know and don't care!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
