Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On Fri 08 Jan 2016 at 02:36:20 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2016-01-07 18:47:48 +, Brian wrote: > > Many WiFi devices require firmware. Some of those devices will not have > > an interface registered (they are not initialised) if the firmware is > > not present to be loaded into the devi

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On 2016-01-07 18:47:48 +, Brian wrote: > Many WiFi devices require firmware. Some of those devices will not have > an interface registered (they are not initialised) if the firmware is > not present to be loaded into the device. Other devices get an interface > whether the firmware is present o

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On Thu 07 Jan 2016 at 13:12:59 +, Brian wrote: > Pass. 70-persistent-net.rules was generated on Jessie and carried over > to testing. You would need a Jessie install on the same machine to > investigate. Perhaps not; one theory could be tested on Stretch. Many WiFi devices require firmware.

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On 2016-01-06 13:55:45 +, Brian wrote: > On Wed 06 Jan 2016 at 13:56:57 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > > On 2016-01-02 16:21:11 +, Brian wrote: > > > > > > Move 70-persistent-net.rules somewhere and do > > > > > > rmmod -v > > > > > > followed by > > > > > > modprobe -v > > >

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On Wed 06 Jan 2016 at 13:56:57 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2016-01-02 16:21:11 +, Brian wrote: > > > > Move 70-persistent-net.rules somewhere and do > > > > rmmod -v > > > > followed by > > > > modprobe -v > > > > Repeat with 70-persistent-net.rules returned to /etc/udev/rule

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On 2016-01-02 16:21:11 +, Brian wrote: > On Fri 01 Jan 2016 at 17:22:37 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > > On 2016-01-01 12:03:32 +, Brian wrote: > > > On Thu 31 Dec 2015 at 19:08:18 +0100, Hans wrote: > > > > What do 'ls /sys/class/net' and 'ip link' give without this addition? > > > >

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

On Thu 31 Dec 2015 at 22:14:49 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > udev is already run in the initramfs. > So for any changes that are made to 70-persistent-net.rules, you need to > rebuild your initramfs. > > Maybe your initramfs contains an outdated udev rules file. > If you update the initramfs via

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On Fri 01 Jan 2016 at 17:22:37 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2016-01-01 12:03:32 +, Brian wrote: > > On Thu 31 Dec 2015 at 19:08:18 +0100, Hans wrote: > > > What do 'ls /sys/class/net' and 'ip link' give without this addition? > > > > > > I get: > > > > > > ls /sys/class/net/ > > > > >

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On 2016-01-01 12:03:32 +, Brian wrote: > On Thu 31 Dec 2015 at 19:08:18 +0100, Hans wrote: > > What do 'ls /sys/class/net' and 'ip link' give without this addition? > > > > I get: > > > > ls /sys/class/net/ > > > > enp1s0 Io wlan0 > > Interesting. One interface is renamed; one is not (wla

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On Thu 31 Dec 2015 at 19:08:18 +0100, Hans wrote: > What do 'ls /sys/class/net' and 'ip link' give without this addition? > > I get: > > ls /sys/class/net/ > > enp1s0 Io wlan0 Interesting. One interface is renamed; one is not (wlan0). [Snip] > I believe, the different outrputs are just be

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

Am Donnerstag, 31. Dezember 2015, 22:14:49 schrieb Michael Biebl: > Am 29.12.2015 um 19:34 schrieb Hans: Hi Michael, > Maybe your initramfs contains an outdated udev rules file. > If you update the initramfs via update-initramfs -u, does that change > anything? No, I already tried this, but it mad

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

Am 29.12.2015 um 19:34 schrieb Hans: > Hi folks, > > just a question about network names, which I do not understand. > > I have two different computers, both are installed with the same versions of > debian packages. But one of it has enp1s0 as network interface name( my EEEPC > 1005HGO) , the

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

Hi Brian, > Is there no sign of any discovered interfaces for the Aspire in the > output of dmesg? > I get this: dmesg | grep eth0 [2.201866] forcedeth :00:0a.0: ifname eth0, PHY OUI 0x732 @ 1, addr 1c:75:08:2c:84:f8 [ 36.198523] forcedeth :00:0a.0 eth0: MSI enabled [ 36.198795

MAC address and security (was: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try))

On 2015-12-30 16:11:39 +0100, Hans wrote: > I changed the MAC cause of security purposes in this mail. FYI: http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/67893/is-it-dangerous-to-post-my-mac-address-publicly -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML -

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

On Wed 30 Dec 2015 at 16:11:39 +0100, Hans wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 30. Dezember 2015, 12:58:23 schrieb Jörg-Volker Peetz: > Hi Jörg-Volker > > Did you take a look at dmesg on both systems? Something like > > > > grep -E '(enp|eth)' /var/log/dmesg > This showed no useful information. The only outp

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

My fault. I sent in HTML, but should be ascii. > Weird, nothing came through this end. You sure you pasted them? I sent the mail again, now in ASCII. Please tell me, if it is not ok the second time. Thank you Hans

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

Am Mittwoch, 30. Dezember 2015, 12:58:23 schrieb Jörg-Volker Peetz: Hi Jörg-Volker > Did you take a look at dmesg on both systems? Something like > > grep -E '(enp|eth)' /var/log/dmesg This showed no useful information. The only output is from my EEEPC below, the Aspire showed no output at all.

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 03:32:04PM +0100, Hans wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 30. Dezember 2015, 12:58:23 schrieb Jörg-Volker Peetz: > Hi Jörg-Volker > > Did you take a look at dmesg on both systems? Something like > > > > grep -E '(enp|eth)' /var/log/dmesg > This showed no useful information. The only o

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

Am Mittwoch, 30. Dezember 2015, 12:58:23 schrieb Jörg-Volker Peetz: Hi Jörg-Volker > Did you take a look at dmesg on both systems? Something like > > grep -E '(enp|eth)' /var/log/dmesg This showed no useful information. The only output is from my EEEPC below, the Aspire showed no output at all.

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

Did you take a look at dmesg on both systems? Something like grep -E '(enp|eth)' /var/log/dmesg Could you show the content of both 70-persistent-net-rules files? Regards, jvp.

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

Hans composed on 2015-12-29 20:55 (UTC+0100): > and both got the same settings What makes you sure of this? ... > The only thing, which IMO would explain it, that the EEEPC is newer than the > other one. But then the hardware must talk to the operation system and give > more information to ude

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

On Tue 29 Dec 2015 at 20:55:45 +0100, Hans wrote: > Hi Brian, Felix and Charlie, > > Persistant name generation is enabled by default since udev 220-7 and > > will be used on new installations or with new hardware. Existing > > installations and hardware which get upgraded to udev 220-7 are covere

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

Hi Brian, Felix and Charlie, > Persistant name generation is enabled by default since udev 220-7 and > will be used on new installations or with new hardware. Existing > installations and hardware which get upgraded to udev 220-7 are covered > by the old 75-persistent-net-generator.rules and will k

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 19:34:43 +0100 Hans wrote: >Hi folks, > >just a question about network names, which I do not understand. > >I have two different computers, both are installed with the same versions of >debian packages. But one of it has enp1s0 as network interface name( my EEEPC >1005HGO) ,

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

On Tue 29 Dec 2015 at 19:34:43 +0100, Hans wrote: > just a question about network names, which I do not understand. > > I have two different computers, both are installed with the same versions of > debian packages. But one of it has enp1s0 as network interface name( my EEEPC > 1005HGO) , the o

Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

Hans composed on 2015-12-29 19:34 (UTC+0100): > just a question about network names, which I do not understand. > I have two different computers, both are installed with the same versions of > debian packages. But one of it has enp1s0 as network interface name( my EEEPC > 1005HGO) , the other o

Question: eth0 vs enp1s0

Hi folks, just a question about network names, which I do not understand. I have two different computers, both are installed with the same versions of debian packages. But one of it has enp1s0 as network interface name( my EEEPC 1005HGO) , the other one the old eth0 scheme (my Aspire 7520G). B