Re: Subject: Re: OT: curious about eth0/eth1

[Tommy McNeely <Tommy.McNeely@Sun.COM>]

--On Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:18:56 PM +1300 Ian Batterbee 
<ian.batterbee@aut.ac.nz> wrote:

>> On a side note... the case you speak of is easily averted by using
>> different cards :)
>>
>> [root@pickles root]# cat /etc/modules.conf
>> alias parport_lowlevel parport_pc
>> alias eth0 3c59x
>> alias eth1 eepro100
>> alias eth2 tulip
>
>
> I'm probably missing something here, but how does that help ?  The
> problem is that if that the eth0 module fails to load for whatever
> reason, then the card that would normally be eth1 would be known as eth0.
>
> If you provide aliases... all that means is that you can do
>
> modprobe eth0
> modprobe eth1
>
> but ... as far as I understand it, those module aliases names have no
> link to the name the kernel allocates to the interface, so if eth0
> failed, it would load eth1 (aliased to eepro100), and the eepro100 would
> be known as eth0 to the kernel.
>
> Or is there some kludgy relationship between module alias names and
> interface names ?
>


I assumed there was a relationship... I can't really test that from here.. 
but um.. I assume it would load eth1 as eepro100 ?? if you compile your 
network devices into the kernel, then you may hafta get a little trickier

Tommy

PS: why doesn't my mail client treat this as a list like redhat's ?


>
>



--
Tommy McNeely         --        Tommy.McNeely@Sun.COM
Sun Microsystems - IT Ops - Broomfield Campus Support
Phone:  x50888 / 303-464-4888  --  Fax:  720-566-3168