On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 13:13 -0800, Mike Johnston wrote:
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Geoff Swan <gsw...@bigpond.net.au>
> To: LFS Support List <lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org>
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 3:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [lfs-support] 70-persistent rules
>
>
> On 10/01/2013 12:27 AM, Mike Johnston wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: Thomas de Roo <tho...@de-roo.org>
> > To: Mike Johnston <mkejohns...@yahoo.com>; LFS Support List
> > <lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org>
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 8:14 AM
> > Subject: Re: [lfs-support] 70-persistent rules
> >
> > On 01/09/13 13:32, Mike Johnston wrote:
> >> From: Michael E. Maher <mich...@maheronline.co.uk>
> >> To: Mike Johnston <mkejohns...@yahoo.com>
> >> Cc: LFS Support List <lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 3:55 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [lfs-support] 70-persistent rules
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 11:03 -0800, Mike Johnston wrote:
> >>> I'm using LFS 7.2 all built and is running almost fine.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I'm trying to get multiple nics with stable names. I have the
> >>> 70-persistent-net.rules file set matching on mac addresses. The
> >>> problem is the file never seems to take effect.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Any ideas what might cause this? Anything in the kernel need to
> >>> configured specifically?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I had this working beautifully on LFS 6.3
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks in advance,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Could be any number of things
> >>> What permissions do you have set for the file?
> >>> Are you sure it is located in the correct directory?
> >> I>s there anything in the output of dmesg?
> >>
> >>> Could you share the contents of the file so we can see if there is
> >>> something wrong with the formatting?
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Michael
> >> Here you go:
> >>
> >> Permissions are 644 root ownership located in /etc/udev/rules.d I'd
> >> really prefer to bus address ("KERNELS==") but that doesn't work, so I
> >> switched to MAC and still can't get it to work.
> >> Nothing shows up in dmesg about renaming or anything like that. It shows
> >> the driver finding the NICs and assigning them the names without any
> >> respect to my rules.
> >>
> >> Here's the contents of the file:
> >>
> >> # This file was automatically generated by the /lib/udev/write_net_rules
> >> # program, run by the persistent-net-generator.rules rules file.
> >> #
> >> # You can modify it, as long as you keep each rule on a single
> >> # line, and change only the value of the NAME= key.
> >>
> >> # net device e1000e
> >> SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*",
> >> ATTR{address}=="00:25:90:a4:9d:4f", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0", ATTR{type}=="1",
> >> KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth1"
> >>
> >> # net device e1000e
> >> SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*",
> >> ATTR{address}=="00:25:90:a4:9d:4e", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0", ATTR{type}=="1",
> >> KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth0"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks again
> >>
> >> Have you tried to put the rule for eth0 first, and the rule for eth1
> >> second?
> >> Groet,
> >> Thomas
> >
> > I have tried same result. It seems like it's not even reading the file at
> > all. Any other configs that I might be missing either in the kernel or
> > elsewhere? Any chance udev is not running the scripts in /lib/udev?
> >
> >
> >
> >Try removing ATTR{dev_id} from the rule, as it's probably not necessary.
>
>
>
> I have done that no effect. Really baffled here. Anything that would stop
> this from being processed on boot up?
>
If you delete the file is it recreated? That should test if the scripts
are running.
I know it's obvious, but are you sure you have the correct MAC address
for each interface. One thing to try if the file is recreated is to
change the name to something like "eth7" to avoid any confusion between
1 and 2.
Thanks,
Michael
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
