On Sun, 2009-03-22 at 17:02 +0000, Akkana Peck wrote:
> It wasn't until now. Or do you mean that this bug report is meant to
> cover only specific chips?
>
This bug report only covers the one specific chip that's MAC address
changes each time.
If unsure (as you clearly are, since you note the MAC is the same in
both) it's *ALWAYS* better to file a new bug than jump into an old one.
Since you haven't attached your 70-persistent-net.rules file, it's hard
to tell, but I suspect you're suffering a different bug.
Scott
--
Scott James Remnant
<email address hidden>
On Sun, 2009-03-22 at 17:02 +0000, Akkana Peck wrote:
> It wasn't until now. Or do you mean that this bug report is meant to
> cover only specific chips?
>
This bug report only covers the one specific chip that's MAC address
changes each time.
If unsure (as you clearly are, since you note the MAC is the same in
both) it's *ALWAYS* better to file a new bug than jump into an old one.
Since you haven't attached your 70-persistent- net.rules file, it's hard
to tell, but I suspect you're suffering a different bug.
Scott
--
Scott James Remnant
<email address hidden>