Re: [CentOS] Traditional network interface naming scheme vs. persistent naming

2015-02-04 Thread Niki Kovacs
Le 04/02/2015 18:48, m.r...@5-cent.us a écrit : That directory, and that file, exist in CentOS, also, since 6. And the new naming... it's*so* much easier to deal with... yeah, right, I'll run the install, and wait till it hangs, so I can see that the NIC is named, what was it, on that HP last mo

Re: [CentOS] Traditional network interface naming scheme vs. persistent naming

2015-02-04 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Niki Kovacs wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently experimenting with CentOS 7 in order to get a grasp of > everything that's new. > > After having read the FAQ entry on network interface names, I decided to > revert to the tradictional interface naming scheme by adding th

Re: [CentOS] Traditional network interface naming scheme vs. persistent naming

2015-02-04 Thread dE
On 02/04/15 22:53, Niki Kovacs wrote: Hi, I'm currently experimenting with CentOS 7 in order to get a grasp of everything that's new. After having read the FAQ entry on network interface names, I decided to revert to the tradictional interface naming scheme by adding the relevant kernel opt

[CentOS] Traditional network interface naming scheme vs. persistent naming

2015-02-04 Thread Niki Kovacs
Hi, I'm currently experimenting with CentOS 7 in order to get a grasp of everything that's new. After having read the FAQ entry on network interface names, I decided to revert to the tradictional interface naming scheme by adding the relevant kernel options to the bootloader. This went well,