On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 01:43:07AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > Besides the fact that ifrename is more of a hack, now that udev enables > > persistent naming of interfaces (z25_persistent-net.rules) udev should > > conflict with ifrename. Otherwise the user could get unexpected results > > if /etc/iftab still exists and the ifrename init script tries to rename the > > interfaces (again) with possibly different names than the ones set in > > z25_persistent-net.rules. > > If you have not noticed yet, the latest udev release by default > automatically generates rules to have persistent names for network > interfaces. > > I am inclined to agree with the bug reporter, but I want to double check > and ask if anybody has other arguments.
I'm sure there are people who use both ifrename and udev, and if udev
Conflicts: with ifrename, and I get bugreports about ifrename being
uninstallable together with udev, I'll reassign them to udev. The two
packages coexist peacefully, but if a user fills in both /etc/iftab and
z25_persistent-net.rules I say he is on his own. A warning in
README.Debian or in debconf is perhaps warranted though.
--
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
