Re: Why eth1 and not eth0 ?

[Timothy Murphy <tim birdsnest maths tcd ie>]

On Wednesday 24 January 2007 01:33, Dan Williams wrote:

> > > > > As a matter of interest, why has my NetworkManager
> > > > > started using eth1 in place of eth0, which it used to use?

> And that's the point; NM means you don't _need_ to care what the device
> name is.  Really, you shouldn't ever need to look at it, nor care what
> it's value is.  I don't tie my devices to MAC addresses, and they switch
> around every now and again, but it doesn't matter to me as they always
> do the right thing under NetworkManager.

As the OP, I don't really mind whether NM (or udev) finds eth0 or eth1.
I just wondered why one or the other changed.

Before I went over to NM, the choice between eth0 and eth1
depended on the entries in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth?
If there was only an ifcfg-eth0 then only eth0 would be used.

As far as I can see NM doesn't look at these files.
I see that my /etc/modprobe.conf contains the lines
alias eth0 orinoco_cs
alias eth1 orinoco_cs
I'm pretty sure I didn't add them - did NM?

[I find programs that alter files like this without telling me
slightly annoying, I must confess.]


-- 
Timothy Murphy  
e-mail (<80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland