In the installation guide, section 21.3 reads as follows # cd /etc/init.d # ln -s net.eth0 net.ethx Only for non-PCMCIA network cards: # rc-update add net.ethx default However, doing this (on my Athlon-XP machine) over the weekend produced a boot- time error message that repeated twice saying net.eth0 already started If I change the above to be the following # cd /etc/init.d # cp net.eth0 net.ethx Only for non-PCMCIA network cards: # rc-update add net.ethx default I now get all three of my interfaces and no boot time errors or warnings about multiple net.eth0 starts. I beleive that this documentation is, therefor, invalid, OR the rc-update proecessor is (instead of looking at the argumnet you pass it) resolving BACK through links to the original filename and storing that which is NOT what (I beleive) you are looking for
mcummings, any idea why this is?
If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say that it is looking at the actual file (following the symlink chain and reading the filename from the "real" file) - but I'm no expert on the runscript.sh Swift - just out of curiosity, why are you pinging me on this?
Aren't you in charge of baselayout?
My error, azarah is the baselayout victim :) Azarah, can you take a look at this?
*** Bug 31008 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Dunno, seems fine over here. Guess the obvious question is what version of baselayout are being used ? --- nosferatu init.d # ln -s net.eth0 net.eth1 nosferatu init.d # /etc/init.d/net.eth1 start * Please make sure that /etc/conf.d/net has $iface_eth1 set nosferatu init.d # ./net.eth1 start * Please make sure that /etc/conf.d/net has $iface_eth1 set nosferatu init.d # ls -l net.eth? -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4966 Oct 26 18:09 net.eth0 lrwxr-xr-x 1 root root 8 Oct 31 23:52 net.eth1 -> net.eth0 nosferatu init.d #
Okay, I'll mark this as WORKSFORME.
Don't if its not. I am not saying it is, and yes, the change to fix it was recent, so if it dont, please let me know.
Well I have had succes stories on #gentoo on this, and it works on my PCs personally, but I didn't know because this was pure luck or a real intention :)
*** Bug 35993 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 38581 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 41989 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 43401 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 47399 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***