On Apr 7, 2013 5:59 PM, "Neil Bothwick" <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote: > > On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 00:34:03 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: > > > > Now I only had to figure out how to rename eth[0-9]+ to the custom > > > naming scheme when using mdev. > > > > ***UDEV*** has broken using "eth[0-9]". mdev works just fine, thank > > you. > > udev has broken nothing, it is avoiding the breakage caused by a > fundamentally flawed renaming procedure. Or does mdev have some magic for > for renaming eth0 to eth1 while eth1 already exists? >
"Broken" or not is totally depending on the eye of the beholder. Server SysAdmins *sometimes* need to reboot, and if the name suddenly changes, that's hell on earth for us. AFAICT, prior to udev-200, once an interface got assigned an ethX moniker, it just won't change name unless there's a hardware change. At least, that's my experience so far. Rgds, --
