2016-05-29 18:28 GMT+02:00 Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net>: > On Sat, 28.05.16 21:38, Martin Pitt (martin.p...@ubuntu.com) wrote: > >> Chris Friesen [2016-05-27 9:14 -0600]: >> > The reason why I'm poking at this is that the old scheme worked "good >> > enough" for us for several years. Now of course the new scheme is better, >> > but it breaks backwards compatibility. This makes it difficult to >> > automatically upgrade an existing system to an OS using the new scheme >> > since >> > all the names would change. (And we've got the old interfaces stored in >> > databases and such in our management software.) >> >> FTR, Debian/Ubuntu do not use the new schema on upgrades for existing >> interfaces, just for new installs, for precisely this reason. >> Specifically, if you already have an existing >> /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules, this will still be present >> (and trump ifnames). But we also disable it for VM upgrades where the >> previous persistent-net-generator was blacklisted. > > I am pretty sure most other distros won't remove the persistend rules > file either on upgrade.
This might be true. Still, since upstream udev removed the workaround to retry getting the renamed name (see the commit I mentioned earlier), it is much more likely to fail now. Fwiw, we reverted that commit in Debian/Ubuntu for that reason [1]. Not sure if other distros do the same. Regards, Michael [1] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-systemd/systemd.git/tree/debian/patches/debian/Revert-udev-network-device-renaming-immediately-give.patch -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel