Re: Re (3): eth0 or eth1

>> Neither ifconfig nor ip use /e/n/i to configure nics. > So the end user need only use ip rather than ifconfig > and not be further concerned about the deprecation? I would worry about its deprecation when it is moved out of main or stops neing maintained. Although, I have read an article wher

Re (3): eth0 or eth1

Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 19:48:46 -0500, Tom H wrote, > Neither ifconfig nor ip use /e/n/i to configure nics. So the end user need only use ip rather than ifconfig and not be further concerned about the deprecation? > /e/n/i may be > referred to in the "see also" section of man page of ifconfig

Re: Re(2): eth0 or eth1

>> The ifconfig command >> is said to be deprecated in favour of iproute ... > Curious.  The Squeeze installer, or Lenny at least, > still creates /etc/network/interfaces doesn't it? > And this file is cited in ifconfig.man but not in > ip.man. > If we are willing to take deprecation of ifconfig

Re(2): eth0 or eth1

I'm resending this after correcting the date on my system. * Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 03:47:55 +0100 Vincent Lefevre wrote, > The ifconfig command > is said to be deprecated in favour of iproute ... Curious. The Squeeze installer, or Lenny at least, still creates /etc/network/interfaces do

Re(2): eth0 or eth1

* Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 03:47:55 +0100 Vincent Lefevre wrote, > The ifconfig command > is said to be deprecated in favour of iproute ... Curious. The Squeeze installer, or Lenny at least, still creates /etc/network/interfaces doesn't it? And this file is cited in ifconfig.man but not in

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 03:47:55AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2010-01-29 12:04:29 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: [snip] > is said to be deprecated in favour of iproute (which now seems to > be called "ip"), which is in /bin. iproute is the package ip is the bin > -- "The fact that he r

Re: eth0 or eth1

On 2010-01-29 12:04:29 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: [ifconfig in /sbin instead of /bin] > If you feel strongly about this, then I suggest that you > file a bug report against the net-tools package and complain > that ifconfig should be moved from /sbin to /bin (or some other > directory in a normal

Re: eth0 or eth1

On 2010-01-29 12:04:29 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: > If you feel strongly about this, then I suggest that you > file a bug report against the net-tools package and complain > that ifconfig should be moved from /sbin to /bin (or some other > directory in a normal user's path). As you know, > "ifco

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:20:30 -0500 (EST), Tong wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 08:48:19 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: >> One other item in the >> procedure that I neglected to mention is to edit /etc/network/interfaces >> to make sure that it says eth0 instead of eth1. > > Thanks Stephen for make it c

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 08:48:19 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: > One other item in the > procedure that I neglected to mention is to edit /etc/network/interfaces > to make sure that it says eth0 instead of eth1. Thanks Stephen for make it comprehensive and complete -- I was luck to somehow have both

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:05:34 -0500, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > However, "ifconfig -a" does not redefine hardware interfaces and > is not a system administration task. Strictly speaking, that is true. However, this "user" was about to redefine his hardware interfaces; and issuing "ifconfig -a" was o

Re: eth0 or eth1

On 2010-01-29 10:07:51 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 02:59:23 -0500, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > For security reasons, it's better to run commands as > > normal users rather than root. > > I tend to be pretty cavalier about that stuff. Some people > go to seed on trying to iss

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 02:59:23 -0500, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > For security reasons, it's better to run commands as > normal users rather than root. I tend to be pretty cavalier about that stuff. Some people go to seed on trying to issue absolutely every possible command that doesn't require root a

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 22:37:07 -0500, Celejar wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:29:54 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 16:27:47 -0500, Celejar wrote: > > > No need to erase the whole file, or to shutdown / reboot (assuming the > > > relevant driver is built as a module). As I note h

Re: eth0 or eth1

On 2010-01-28 19:57:42 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:11:29 -0500, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2010-01-28 16:09:11 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: > > > By default, ifconfig only shows active interfaces. Issue "ifconfig -a" > > > to show *all* interfaces. (You have to be roo

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:29:54 -0500 (EST) Stephen Powell wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 16:27:47 -0500, Celejar wrote: > > No need to erase the whole file, or to shutdown / reboot (assuming the > > relevant driver is built as a module). As I note here, just comment out > > the relevant line, and the

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:11:29 -0500, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2010-01-28 16:09:11 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: > > By default, ifconfig only shows active interfaces. Issue "ifconfig -a" > > to show *all* interfaces. (You have to be root of course.) > > No need to be root! On my system you *do

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:01:46 -0500, T o n g wrote: > Thanks to Celejar & Stephen's help. I get it corrected without rebooting. > Here is my detailed steps: > > $ dmesg | grep 'ethernet driver' > [1795967.314420] forcedeth: Reverse Engineered nForce ethernet driver... > > rm /etc/udev/rules.d/70-

Re: eth0 or eth1

On 2010-01-28 16:09:11 -0500, Stephen Powell wrote: > By default, ifconfig only shows active interfaces. Issue "ifconfig -a" > to show *all* interfaces. (You have to be root of course.) No need to be root! -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML -

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:17:21 -0600, Chance Platt wrote: >> One of My Debian has eth1 as the Ethernet card, while all others use >> eth0. There are only one Ethernet card in each system. Why the >> different? >> > Is there more than one NIC in your system? No, there is only one NIC in my system.

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 16:27:47 -0500, Celejar wrote: > No need to erase the whole file, or to shutdown / reboot (assuming the > relevant driver is built as a module). As I note here, just comment out > the relevant line, and then unload and reload the relevant kernel > module. I figured there was pr

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 16:09:11 -0500 (EST) Stephen Powell wrote: ... > If there is no other interface shown, look for a file in /etc/udev/rules.d > that has "persistent-net.rules" in it. The actual file name is > dependent on the architecture and the release of Debian. Look in this > file. You

Re: eth0 or eth1

T o n g wrote: Hi, One of My Debian has eth1 as the Ethernet card, while all others use eth0. There are only one Ethernet card in each system. Why the different? How can I have consistent 'eth0' throughout all systems? Thanks Is there more than one NIC in your system? If not, delete the

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Thursday 28 January 2010 14:53:47 T o n g wrote: > One of My Debian has eth1 as the Ethernet card, while all others use > eth0. There are only one Ethernet card in each system. Why the different? Network device names are controlled by the kernel, in cooperation with udev. I suggest looking at

Re: eth0 or eth1

Read my replay complete before go to the links. On 28/01/10 16:23, T o n g wrote: Hi, One of My Debian has eth1 as the Ethernet card, while all others use eth0. There are only one Ethernet card in each system. Why the different? "An explanation I saw in another post explained that with newe

Re: eth0 or eth1

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:37:47 -0500, T o n g wrote: > Hi, > > One of My Debian has eth1 as the Ethernet card, while all others use > eth0. There are only one Ethernet card in each system. Why the different? > > How can I have consistent 'eth0' throughout all systems? > > Thanks > By default, if

eth0 or eth1

Hi, One of My Debian has eth1 as the Ethernet card, while all others use eth0. There are only one Ethernet card in each system. Why the different? How can I have consistent 'eth0' throughout all systems? Thanks -- Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply) http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/ h