# 2.6.23 doesn't like 3COM's 3c556 ?!? [SOLVED]

## SxN

Hi All,

I compiled a 2.6.23 kernel, and enabled the 3c590/3c900 network device driver, which is supposed to work with my 3c556 (and it worked wonderfuly on kernel 2.6.18). Now there is no trace of my eth0.

How should I proceed?

Thanks for advice,

SxNLast edited by SxN on Sun Mar 16, 2008 6:03 pm; edited 1 time in total

----------

## desultory

```
ifconfig -a # To check for all known interfaces, regardless of name.

lsmod # To check which modules are loaded, this can probably be skipped if the module was built in.

mv /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules ~/ # To get it out of the way while retaining it if desirable.
```

----------

## NeddySeagoon

SxN,

Try this process to fix your network.

Often, the automatic module loading mechanisms do not load the module for your network card.

You need to modprobe it and/or add it to /etc/modules.autoload.d/kernel-2.6

----------

## SxN

ifconfig -a is showing me an eth1 !!! That I didn't expect. Can I force it to become eth0?

Thanks,

SxN

----------

## SxN

An update:

I copied /etc/init.d/net.eth0 to /etc/init.d/net.eth1, deleted eth0 from default and replaced it with eth1. It works.

Still, how did I end up with eth1? Can I go back to eth0?

Thanks,

SxN

----------

## desultory

 *SxN wrote:*   

> Still, how did I end up with eth1?

 It was due to how udev maintains consistent naming for specific interfaces.

 *SxN wrote:*   

> Can I go back to eth0?

 Yes, mv /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules ~/ to get the naming rules out of the way while preserving them in case there are other rules you intend to reuse.

----------

## GNUtoo

why do you still use 2.6.23 with the 2 vmsplice security bugs that are present until the 2.6.24.2 kenrel?

----------

## SxN

desultory, THANKS

GNUtoo, my choice was Gentoo 2007 hardened, and that's how I end up with 2.6.23. In truth, I would have liked to go to kernel.org and take the latest and the greatest stable kernel (which, right now, is 2.6.24.3), but I don't know what's the difference between the stock kernels and the Gentoo-adapted ones.

SxN

----------

## desultory

The differences are mostly a matter of timing and testing gentoo-sources, and by derivation hardened-sources, receive patches which are not yet included in the stable releases upstream though they are generally patches which are to be included in near term stable releases by upstream. Aside from that gentoo-sources, and various derivations of it, are officially supported by Gentoo while the upstream kernel releases are, largely theoretically, not.

In short, gentoo-sources and its derivatives should provide a more thoroughly tested, better supported kernel with better hardware support, potentially in each case only somewhat.

Note that the vmplice() vulnerability has been patched in the 2.6.23-r8 and later and 2.6.24-r2 and later revisions of gentoo-sources and its derivatives.

----------

## NeddySeagoon

GNUtoo,

gentoo-sources has vmsplice fixed in 2.6.23-gentoo-r8

----------

## GNUtoo

thanks for the info...

what was the difference in time(for the fix ) between:

->the 2.6.24.2-vanilla

->the gentoo-sources

->the hardened-sources

----------

## NeddySeagoon

GNUtoo,

This thread has most of the information you are looking for. The posts by dsd are probably the most relevant as hes the kernel dev that did the fixes.

I believe that hardened lagged a day or two as the exploit caused a segfault on a properly configured hardened system but with   the possibility of locking the machine up by repeating it fast enough, causing a DoS.

----------

## GNUtoo

thanks a lot...

----------

## SxN

Thanks to your suggestions, I was able to understand what happened and fix the problem. I installed first the Gentoo for a Thinkpad (the machine that I have on loan), and there eth0 was associated with the MAC of that network card. Than, using the same hard drive, I reconfigured the relevant options in the kernel, targeting a Dell Latitude (that's mine). But, as eth0 was already associated with the first MAC, the new MAC was placed on eth1. And so I lost eth0...

I did the necessary corrections in /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules, et voila!

Again, thanks folks,

SxN

----------

