On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 04:40:07PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
> Le 16/07/2018 à 15:04, Hendrik Boom a écrit :
> > > > > > I solved this editing
> > > > > > the /etc/roules.d/peresist.rules and use names like nic0, nic1. And I
> > > > > > changed the /etc/networking/interfaces to the new names.
> > > > > Those files done't seem to exists in my /etc.
> > > > But there is a /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules
> > > > so I'll try editing that.
> > > >
> > >     I got the feeling that those /etc/udev files are ignored nowadays.
> > > Therefore better hack in /lib/udev. But, if you disable interface renaming
> > > in the kernel command arguments, this hack will have no effect.
> > Editing that file worked, so evidently it wasn't ignored. Is it likely
> > to be ignored in the future? Is there another mechanism I should be
> > looking into? Will vdev or eudev (or any other expected *dev) do things
> > differently?
>
>     Means I was wrong (-: I might have been induced in error by the fact
> that some rule files exist in /lib/udev and not in /etc/udev, and ancient
> versions had all rule files in /etc/udev.

  Those days udev follow rules:
  - files in /usr/lib/udev (/lib/udev on Debian) are shipped with
    package, thus will be replaced by apt update; these files should not
    be modified
  - files in /etc/udev are owned by sysadmin. This is the proper place
    for customizations, files in /etc won't be touched by packaging
  - if there are files with the same name in /lib and /etc, the one
    from /etc (sysadmin-owned) wins.

Bonus rule, /run/udev files win over /etc, but are removed on reboot.

This is described in “man udev”, chapter “RULES FILES”.

-- 
Tomasz Torcz                                                       72->|   80->|
xmpp: zdzichubg@???                                          72->|   80->|