Ethernet problem

billw

New Member
Credits
0
Hey there, late to the party :)

I have two suggestions..

1st, have you tried to re-seat the card? That's saved me in the past..
2nd, if that doesn't work, I myself would probably just hit amazon for a new ethernet card for ~$10 or so..
Yes Rob that is another option. The ethernet controller now is Mb resident so no issue with seating (and was functioning well before I blew away windows. I screwed up by doing that prematurely as it would make a nice troubleshooting tool). I thought of the special handling of the mac addr issue. I made sure the static ip that I had set up at the old house was clear. I can't think of any other special setting for the mac addr in the router that would interfere but I'll go through it again and look.

Thanks for the suggestions!
 


billw

New Member
Credits
0
I am now posting from an old laptop that I remembered had a hardwired LAN interface. It is running a version of Ubuntu that was current about a year and a half ago. It came right up (DHCP) and yes I did disable the wireless radio :) . I'm not sure what this proves but at least the hardware between here and the outside world is fine.
 

atanere

Well-Known Member
Credits
0
I'm not sure what this proves but at least the hardware between here and the outside world is fine.
It puts the focus of the problem squarely back on the old computer and its onboard adapter. And unless something miraculous happens, I think I'd go with @Rob's suggestion to just grab a cheap NIC off the internet and try to run with that. I'd probably go back into BIOS to disable this adapter too.

It's still quite a mystery to me... Linux and DHCP will talk to just about anything over ethernet.

Oh well. "Stuff happens".... or something like that. o_O:D

Cheers
 

billw

New Member
Credits
0
It puts the focus of the problem squarely back on the old computer and its onboard adapter. And unless something miraculous happens, I think I'd go with @Rob's suggestion to just grab a cheap NIC off the internet and try to run with that. I'd probably go back into BIOS to disable this adapter too.

It's still quite a mystery to me... Linux and DHCP will talk to just about anything over ethernet.

Oh well. "Stuff happens".... or something like that. o_O:D

Cheers
Yes, I think I'm going to head that direction. A cheap troubleshooting tool if nothing else.
Something I'm not familiar with and haven't spent time to track down yet. Is there a chance that eno1 is not tied to the hardware device on the motherboard?
 

atanere

Well-Known Member
Credits
0
Is there a chance that eno1 is not tied to the hardware device on the motherboard?
I'm not sure if I understand the question correctly. You probably remember "back in the day" when the first ethernet interface would always be called eth0, and the first wireless device was wlan0. Gee, I miss those days sometimes. Well, anyway, while we've been discussing your problem, I found this page that actually identifies eno1 as an onboard ethernet device, and I think that answers your question. That is, I do think the hardware is correctly identified, although I did not recognize it as such myself.

FYI, this new scheme is called Predictable Network Interface Names... uh-huh, yeah, right. It's a systemd thing. I get it, but I don't really like it. The link does describe how to change it back to eth0, but I guess I'm too lazy for that, even though I don't like it. The new naming method hasn't really caused me problems, only confusion, especially when it first came out.
 

billw

New Member
Credits
0
I'm not sure if I understand the question correctly. You probably remember "back in the day" when the first ethernet interface would always be called eth0, and the first wireless device was wlan0. Gee, I miss those days sometimes. Well, anyway, while we've been discussing your problem, I found this page that actually identifies eno1 as an onboard ethernet device, and I think that answers your question. That is, I do think the hardware is correctly identified, although I did not recognize it as such myself.

FYI, this new scheme is called Predictable Network Interface Names... uh-huh, yeah, right. It's a systemd thing. I get it, but I don't really like it. The link does describe how to change it back to eth0, but I guess I'm too lazy for that, even though I don't like it. The new naming method hasn't really caused me problems, only confusion, especially when it first came out.
What made me scratch my head was the 0 or 1 thing. My MB has one device on it. Back in the stoneage that would be device 0. I guess when the kernel comes up, if an onboard adapter exists it's created to be eno1, if #2 exist then eno2 is created etc. I was reasonably confident that the kernel would create that device based on the existence of the hardware, but I'm grasping for straws now!
 

atanere

Well-Known Member
Credits
0
I'm not familiar with the naming conventions, but I would guess that Fedora has identified yours correctly. My ethernet is enp2s0.... so zero still applies in some cases (this is slot 0).
 

dos2unix

Well-Known Member
Credits
1,668
with Fedora (I suspect just about all Linux's)... the bus numbering goes something like this.
eno o = "onboard"
enp p = pci bus.
enu u = usb device.

So enp2s0 = pci bus 2, slot 0.

Back in the old 2.x 3.x kernel days , it didn't care too much where the device was... so everything was eth0 or eth1.
 

atanere

Well-Known Member
Credits
0
with Fedora (I suspect just about all Linux's)... the bus numbering goes something like this.
With all systemd Linux's, yes. Systemd (udev) "renames" eth0, which you can see in dmesg | grep -i eth. Other distros, MX Linux, antiX, EasyOS (an early version I just tested), and probably Devuan too.... these all still show eth0. (I don't have Devuan on DVD right now to confirm for sure.)

[EDIT] Heck, I forgot to list the biggest non-systemd distro... Slackware! [/EDIT]

So many distros have gone to systemd that I have no doubt it is a good thing. Arch, Debian, RedHat, and all their many derivatives... like you said, "just about all" :D. But I'm old, and lazy, and it's hard for me to change. UEFI still kicks my butt too (as well as some other distros, even today, such as Linux Lite). :eek:o_O:D
 
Last edited:

dos2unix

Well-Known Member
Credits
1,668
So many distros have gone to systemd that I have no doubt it is a good thing. Arch, Debian, RedHat, and all their many derivatives... like you said, "just about all" :D. But I'm old, and lazy, and it's hard for me to change. UEFI still kicks my butt too (as well as some other distros, even today, such as Linux Lite). :eek:o_O:D
Interesting.. I guess I am more out of touch than I thought. I haven't seen a non-systemd/ non-Network-manager in a few years. Perhaps it's just the distro's I tend to use.

In fact ifup and ifdown commands do not work on many of the distro's I am currently using.

The main advantage to having a process manage your other processes, is that the PIDs are
managed by the "system daemon". It's almost impossible to get zombie processes under
systemd.
 

billw

New Member
Credits
0
I received the $15 network card from Amazon today. I plugged it in and it came right up. As usual, no config necessary, it was recognized, linked to the proper driver and activated. I'm not even going to try to understand why I had ethernet access before under Windows. At this point I don't care :D. It's time to move forward and get the Windows partition rebuilt. Thanks guys (and gals?) for all the support.

Bill
 


Members online


Latest posts

Top