So another vote for keeping the eth0/wlan0 scheme and
not renaming devices in userspace.
Like Rick I haven't encountered a spontaneous device name
re-order in the wild.
However, some time ago the authors of the reverse engineered
nvidia ethernet driver (was it forcedeth?) noticed they had
decode
Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com):
> As a wee lad, my mentors told me never to put two of the same model
> NICs in a computer, because which one became eth0 and which became eth1
> would be indeterminate from boot to boot.
It's funny you'll say that, and not just because we're both o
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 10:36:00PM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 01:41:57PM -0400, Gary Olzeke wrote:
> > my ignorance may be showing here:
> > I am surprised that there isn't an fstab-style record of MACs to ethX/wlanX
> > that way a MOTD-style popup could alert for a change
On 20.08.17 22:36, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> If you want to be compaatible with what systemd does, you will end up
> being as complicated as systemd.
The entire premise for the existence of Devuan is to NOT BE LIKE SYSTEMD.
If that can't be adhered to, then it's time to move on to FreeBSD.
I hear t
On 20.08.17 22:24, Steve Litt wrote:
> #FOR SINGLE WIFI AND ETH DEVICES
> $eth0=enop1
> $wlan0=wl52po45tldnr
If we can script the decryption of the obfuscating nonsense, then
developers ought to not be so much less competent that they can't do it
at the outset. (I did my 30 years on bare iron (emb
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 01:41:57PM -0400, Gary Olzeke wrote:
> +3 for the eth0/wlan0 naming scheme - yes I'm stuffing the vote!!
...
> my ignorance may be showing here:
> I am surprised that there isn't an fstab-style record of MACs to ethX/wlanX
> that way a MOTD-style popup could alert for a chan
On 20.08.17 16:09, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:38:00AM +1200, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> > This would lead network interface names default to the old "eth0" or
> > "wlan0" scheme, rather than the new(?) "enp0s3"-like scheme. It implies
> > having "net.ifnames=1" in the kernel cmd
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 15:53:40 -0400
fsmithred wrote:
> Yeah, the name on a usb dongle is insane. I didn't stick with it long
> enough to figure out if that number comes from somewhere or is random.
LOL, I stuck a wifi dongle into a USB hub plugged into a USB port, and
the NIC name was about 10 c
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 16:38:18 +0100
Rowland Penny wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 17:18:13 +0200
> Adam Borowski wrote:
> > You can't safely rename to eth0/wlan0. At bootup, when an interface
> > is being cold/hot-plugged, an *udev script is run. When that script
> > decides that the interface th
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:38:00AM +1200, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> This would lead network interface names default to the old "eth0" or
> "wlan0" scheme, rather than the new(?) "enp0s3"-like scheme. It implies
> having "net.ifnames=1" in the kernel cmdline to get the "enp0s3"-like
> scheme and not t
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 at 17:24:30 +0200
viverna wrote:
> il devuanizzato Daniel Reurich il 20/08/17 alle
> ore 15:38 ha scritto:
> > This would lead network interface names default to the old "eth0" or
> > "wlan0" scheme, rather than the new(?) "enp0s3"-like scheme. It implies
> > having "net.ifna
Adam Borowski wrote:
> There was a lengthy thread on debian-devel recently. While it did include
> the usual shout-fest, there's also a good amount of actually relevant info,
> thus I'd recommend reading it.
>
> It starts at:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/07/msg00126.html
It is
On 08/20/2017 10:27 AM, Adam Borowski wrote:
>
> * systemd-udev's promise of providing _stable_ names didn't deliver. They
> still change on major kernel upgrades, and sometimes on every boot.
> And their chosen naming is utterly insane (wlxf81a671bcfae, WTF?).
> Only systemd proponents st
> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2017 17:24:30 +0200
> From: viverna
>
> il devuanizzato Daniel Reurich il 20/08/17 alle ore
> 15:38 ha scritto:
>> This would lead network interface names default to the old "eth0" or
>> "wlan0" scheme, rather than the new(?) "enp0s3"-like scheme. It implies
>> having "net.i
+3 for the eth0/wlan0 naming scheme - yes I'm stuffing the vote!!
'
re: MAC address - each vendor is supposed to have their own pool of numbers.
some cards can be programmed with a MAC - so that sysadmins could replace a
card and not have to reconfigure servers.
'
re: MAC
there was/is an issue on A
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 7:08 PM, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We discussed a few weeks back in a dev meeting whether or not to revert
> to jessie like naming scheme for ethernet interfaces by default.
>
> The eudev package (currently found in the experimental repos and at
> https://git.devuan.o
El 20/08/17 a les 16:48, Lars Noodén ha escrit:
> On 08/20/2017 04:38 PM, Daniel Reurich wrote:
>> We discussed a few weeks back in a dev meeting whether or not to revert
>> to jessie like naming scheme for ethernet interfaces by default.
>
> My only interest would be consistency: that the same ph
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 16:38:18 +0100
Rowland Penny wrote:
> As far as I am aware, each network device should have a different MAC,
> couldn't this be used to identify which device is which ?
Could, but whenever you have to change a NIC after a thunderstorm you are
buggered...
Cheers,
Ron.
--
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 at 16:38, Daniel Reurich
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We discussed a few weeks back in a dev meeting whether or not to revert
> to jessie like naming scheme for ethernet interfaces by default.
>
> The eudev package (currently found in the experimental repos and at
> https://git.devuan.org
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 17:18:13 +0200
Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 03:45:08PM +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
> > On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 16:27:26 +0200
> > Adam Borowski wrote:
> [my snip:]
> > > * any renames to "eth0"/"wlan0" are a losing idea, as a new
> > > interface can appear at an
il devuanizzato Daniel Reurich il 20/08/17 alle ore
15:38 ha scritto:
> This would lead network interface names default to the old "eth0" or
> "wlan0" scheme, rather than the new(?) "enp0s3"-like scheme. It implies
> having "net.ifnames=1" in the kernel cmdline to get the "enp0s3"-like
> scheme a
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 03:45:08PM +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 16:27:26 +0200
> Adam Borowski wrote:
[my snip:]
> > * any renames to "eth0"/"wlan0" are a losing idea, as a new interface
> > can appear at any moment, clashing with what you just tried to rename
> > to. Several
On 08/20/2017 04:38 PM, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> We discussed a few weeks back in a dev meeting whether or not to revert
> to jessie like naming scheme for ethernet interfaces by default.
My only interest would be consistency: that the same physical device
always gets the same name, even if some of
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 16:27:26 +0200, Adam wrote in message
<20170820142726.ojyrd6plsfjmc...@angband.pl>:
> But sticking with just kernel names would still be much better than
> the enp0s3 idea. It'd be _predictable_ in that 99% case; machines
> with multiple interfaces tend to be either routers (
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 16:27:26 +0200
Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:38:00AM +1200, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> > We discussed a few weeks back in a dev meeting whether or not to
> > revert to jessie like naming scheme for ethernet interfaces by
> > default.
> >
> > The eudev package
Le 20/08/2017 à 16:27, Adam Borowski a écrit :
Thus, I think the best long-term solution would be writing a generation,
using either *udev or ifupdown, that learns new interfaces as they come,
and names them using a single namespace that's not "eth0"/"wlan0".
In particular, a machine with only a
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:38:00AM +1200, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> We discussed a few weeks back in a dev meeting whether or not to revert
> to jessie like naming scheme for ethernet interfaces by default.
>
> The eudev package (currently found in the experimental repos and at
> https://git.devuan.
On 21.08.17 01:38, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> This would lead network interface names default to the old "eth0" or
> "wlan0" scheme, rather than the new(?) "enp0s3"-like scheme. It implies
> having "net.ifnames=1" in the kernel cmdline to get the "enp0s3"-like
> scheme and not touching anything to get
On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 01:38:00 +1200
Daniel Reurich wrote:
> It implies
> having "net.ifnames=1" in the kernel cmdline to get the "enp0s3"-like
> scheme and not touching anything to get the "eth0" scheme.
+1
Cheers,
Ron.
--
Those of you who think you know everything
Hi,
We discussed a few weeks back in a dev meeting whether or not to revert
to jessie like naming scheme for ethernet interfaces by default.
The eudev package (currently found in the experimental repos and at
https://git.devuan.org/devuan-packages/eudev ) utilizes the same logic
like udev does wh
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 02:08:23PM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 07:38:30AM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > I'm trying to make sure I don't do something catastrophic by
> > misunderstanding.
> >
> > I do
> >
> > lvcreate --name ascii-root --size 3G jessie
> >
> > to create
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 07:38:30AM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> I'm trying to make sure I don't do something catastrophic by
> misunderstanding.
>
> I do
>
> lvcreate --name ascii-root --size 3G jessie
>
> to create a logical volume called "ascii-root" within the volume
> group "jessie".
>
>
I'm trying to make sure I don't do something catastrophic by
misunderstanding.
I do
lvcreate --name ascii-root --size 3G jessie
to create a logical volume called "ascii-root" within the volume
group "jessie".
Then I look at the result by
ls /dev/mapper
and get:
root@notlookedfor:/# lvcreat
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've been wondering this for a while now, so finally figure I'd
> ask. For those of us in the U.S. is there a difference if we use
> us.mirror.devuan.org, or auto.mirror.devuan.org? If there is a
> difference, then what is it exactl
34 matches
Mail list logo
