Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #210607
| From | The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: 70-persistent-net-rules no longer supported? (Was Re: Document removal of ecryptfs-utils from Buster) |
| Date | 2019-07-02 16:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <yfrXc-1Ci-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <yeZey-UH-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <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> |
| Organization | This space intentionally left blank. |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
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. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
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