auto upgrade unintentionally updates /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules

Bug #1495452 reported by Oliver Grawert on 2015-09-14
8
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Snappy
Status tracked in Trunk
15.04
High
Oliver Grawert
Trunk
High
Oliver Grawert

Bug Description

i am using a statically set up interface through the new snappy config ubuntu-core mechanism, setting the detected eth0 device to a static IP and GW ...

my snappy install did an auto-upgrade over night and considered that my eth0 device needs a new name, so it added the same device line that already exists in /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules with a new name (eth3) ... this should indeed never happen, the machine is not reachable anymore now after it tried to boot into the newly upgraded system-b partition ...

Oliver Grawert (ogra) wrote :
Oliver Grawert (ogra) wrote :
Oliver Grawert (ogra) wrote :

note in syslog:
Sep 14 09:16:01 aleph2 kernel: [ 43.590490] r8169 0000:01:00.0 eth3: renamed from eth0

Martin Pitt (pitti) wrote :

At first sight this sounds like https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=765577 which got fixed in http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-systemd/systemd.git/diff/?id=f9cb380a . I . e. it's fixed in Debian jessie and sid, and Ubuntu wily (via completely removing this rules generator), but Ubuntu vivid already has that fix as well.

Martin Pitt (pitti) wrote :

It's very suspicious that the kernel gets written twice. Can you please check if this is yet another case of the boot racing with any potential bind-mounting of /etc/udev/rules.d or the 70-persistent-net.rules file?

Martin Pitt (pitti) wrote :

IOW, don't bind-mount /etc/udev/rules.d/ in the running system -- you have to mount it (and in general, everything in /etc) in initramfs.

Alexander Sack (asac) on 2015-09-14
Changed in snappy:
milestone: none → 15.04.3
assignee: nobody → Oliver Grawert (ogra)
Leo Arias (elopio) wrote :

Hello ogra. This says it's fix released for 15.04. I suppose it's in master too, but I wonder why it still says work in progress. Do you know if there's some work missing for fixing this issue?

Michael Vogt (mvo) wrote :

We no longer have 70-persistent-net.rules in 16

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.