Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*network\s+interface\s+names\s+ethX\s+and\s+renaming\s+interfaces\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. Re: network interface names ethX and renaming interfaces (score: 1)
Author: t <ahu@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 11:01:28 +1100
What an interesting corner case. I assume that there's a good (speed?) reason why init_etherdev doesn't use dev_alloc_name() or equiv. Of course, I never thought anyone would rename interfaces to the
/archives/netdev/2001-12/msg00061.html (8,231 bytes)

2. Re: network interface names ethX and renaming interfaces (score: 1)
Author: t@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:11:56 +0300 (MSK)
It was simply heavily broken. Well, if all was right in x.y, there were no reasons to work n kernel x.y+1. Right? :-) Alexey
/archives/netdev/2001-12/msg00068.html (7,564 bytes)

3. Re: network interface names ethX and renaming interfaces (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:56:02 +0100
So is anybody already working on a fix? If not, I would try to produce one over Xmas; your input & advice would be welcome. -Hein PS: what is netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx?
/archives/netdev/2001-12/msg00072.html (8,767 bytes)

4. Re: network interface names ethX and renaming interfaces (score: 1)
Author: vem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:49:16 +1100 (EST)
Not exactly "working on a fix", but I did take a closer look since my earlier email. I don't claim to be a seasoned hacker (i.e. probably missed a few things) - this is what I did pick up: (1) lack o
/archives/netdev/2001-12/msg00075.html (10,559 bytes)

5. Re: network interface names ethX and renaming interfaces (score: 1)
Author: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 11:01:28 +1100
What an interesting corner case. I assume that there's a good (speed?) reason why init_etherdev doesn't use dev_alloc_name() or equiv. Of course, I never thought anyone would rename interfaces to the
/archives/netdev/2001-12/msg00158.html (8,283 bytes)

6. Re: network interface names ethX and renaming interfaces (score: 1)
Author: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:11:56 +0300 (MSK)
Hello! It was simply heavily broken. Well, if all was right in x.y, there were no reasons to work n kernel x.y+1. Right? :-) Alexey
/archives/netdev/2001-12/msg00165.html (7,589 bytes)

7. Re: network interface names ethX and renaming interfaces (score: 1)
Author: Hein Roehrig <hein@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:56:02 +0100
So is anybody already working on a fix? If not, I would try to produce one over Xmas; your input & advice would be welcome. -Hein PS: what is netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx?
/archives/netdev/2001-12/msg00169.html (8,857 bytes)

8. Re: network interface names ethX and renaming interfaces (score: 1)
Author: Neale Banks <neale@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:49:16 +1100 (EST)
Not exactly "working on a fix", but I did take a closer look since my earlier email. I don't claim to be a seasoned hacker (i.e. probably missed a few things) - this is what I did pick up: (1) lack o
/archives/netdev/2001-12/msg00172.html (10,611 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu