Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #210627
| From | Geoff <unit735@bigpond.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) |
| Date | 2019-07-03 04:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <yfDbY-8sS-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <yfpLH-nK-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <yfqeJ-xm-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <yfqy5-E5-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <yfrNv-1zb-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <yfrXc-1Ci-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
The Wanderer wrote: > On 2019-07-02 at 10:10, Curt wrote: > >> On 2019-07-02, The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> wrote: >> >>>> Not even that, it seems (no longer affects systemd). >>> >>> Have you confirmed that? It seems possible that on a systemd >>> machine, things in other packages (such as whatever would provide >>> that 99-default.link file, which unfortunately - because it's under >>> /etc/ - can't be easily found through 'apt-file search') might >>> still be overriding 70-persistent-net.rules, even with this change >>> reverted. >> >> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/11436 >> >> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/ed30802324365dde6c05d0b7c3ce1a0eff3bf571 >> >> Let's revert, and start with a clean slate. This fixes #11436. >> >> (#11436 being 'network interface is renamed although NAME has been >> set by udev rule'.) > > Yeah, I read that, although I didn't read #11436. > >> Maybe I'm not understanding this (quite possible). > > I think you're reading it the same way I am. I'm just questioning > whether what we're seeing here represents the whole picture, and partly > also whether this is the latest word on the subject. > > It might be interesting to know when that section of the release notes > was last modified, relative to when this change was made. > >> Somebody on an up-to-date Buster could perform Michael Biebl's bug >> reproduction test: > > In particular, someone on a machine running full-on systemd. My > available machines are either non-systemd or not systemd-as-init, so my > observed results aren't applicable. > I'm running up to date sid and using systemd and still have an eth0 as set by 70-persistent-net.rules. Geoff
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-06-30 12:00 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Andrea Borgia <andrea@borgia.bo.it> - 2019-06-30 17:40 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2019-06-30 18:20 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-06-30 18:50 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2019-07-01 10:00 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-07-01 12:10 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-07-01 15:20 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2019-07-01 15:50 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-07-01 16:10 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-07-01 22:00 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-07-01 15:40 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2019-07-01 15:50 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-07-01 22:00 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2019-07-01 22:20 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-07-02 01:50 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-07-02 11:20 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2019-07-07 02:10 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Andrea Borgia <andrea@borgia.bo.it> - 2019-06-30 19:00 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2019-06-30 19:50 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-06-30 21:20 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-07-01 09:50 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-07-01 16:20 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-07-01 16:50 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-07-01 17:50 +0200
Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-07-01 16:20 +0200
70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2019-07-02 14:10 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-07-02 14:40 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2019-07-02 15:00 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2019-07-02 15:20 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-07-02 15:20 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-07-02 16:20 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2019-07-02 16:30 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-07-02 21:20 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? Stephan Seitz <stse+debian@fsing.rootsland.net> - 2019-07-03 09:20 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-07-03 10:10 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-07-03 11:30 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) Geoff <unit735@bigpond.com> - 2019-07-03 04:30 +0200
Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2019-07-08 11:20 +0200
csiph-web