Am 15.08.2013 16:53, schrieb Ben Greear: > On 08/15/2013 07:18 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> >> Am 15.08.2013 16:05, schrieb Ben Greear: >>>> with 4 NIC's this was never predictable and mostly luck >>>> the only stupid thing is that this this new crap names also appear >>>> if there is only one NIC or at least only identical ones with >>>> the same driver what makes race-conditions unlikely >>> >>> I understand why the names come up jumbled on bootup, but there is no excuse >>> for udev not being able to properly rename them as requested >> >> ask Kay Sievers , he is able to explain it to you too >> >> in short: >> the kernel may also rename the devices as they come up >> if kernel want make one nic to eth1 and udev at the same time another one -> >> collision > > That's fine. Udev can just detect the collision and try again, potentially > moving the other one to a new name. That is what it has done for years, > in between bugs that caused eth0.rename devices to be left lying around.
well complain at the udev/systemd-guys and the ones before who came up with "biosdevname" you know that, i know that, you asked, i gave you an answer more can hardly do a *user* in this case
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
