Simon Hobson <linux@???> writes:
> Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@???> wrote:
>
>>> All in all, the easiest way by far is to use stable and user(admin)
>>> set names for interfaces !
>>
>> This is going to bite you in the posterior in case of canned OS
>> installations intended to be usable on a wide range of differently
>> configured 'servers' and not supposed to be maintained by anyhow
>> 'UNIX(*)-savy' personnel, IOW, appliance-type installations. I need
>> interface names which are stable, generally predictable (ie, if there
>> are two interfaces they'll end up as eth0 and eth1), machine and
>> NIC-independent and compatible with already existing software. The
>> kernel naming scheme provides pretty much exactly what I
>> need. Consequenstly, I'm determined to keep using it and software which
>> gets in the way will be changed.
>
> If you just use the default kernel naming scheme then you open
> yourself to the problem that udev was designed to solve - that of
> random device names.

If you'll neither believe me nor the code wrt causes these 'random
device names', may I try some kind of authority?

    7.4.3.7. Device naming order changes randomly after rebooting

    This is due to the fact that Udev, by design, handles uevents
    and loads modules in parallel, and thus in an unpredictable
    order.

        http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/7.5/chapter07/udev.html