this has been discussed before and IIRC the theory is that the scripts deal w/ whatever you name the interface when you add it to the system.  If you add an interface named &#39;em1&#39; it would configure and interface &#39;em1&#39;, just like for &#39;eth0&#39;.<br>

<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Zack Perry <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:zack.perry@sbcglobal.net" target="_blank">zack.perry@sbcglobal.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>

<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I finally got around to test cobbler 2.4.0 from epel-testing to PXE boot<br>
Fedora 17.  After the past few days struggles with Ubuntu, doing RH<br>
alike systems is like having a break :-)<br>
<br>
Nevertheless, I noticed that the system came up with em1. This is not<br>
news to me, and I know how to deal with it. But the Q is, up to now,<br>
the snippets bundled with cobbler 2.4.0 still assumes that the first<br>
network interface is named as eth0.  What is the current plan in dealing<br>
this device name change (which I know quite a few people are not happy&#39;<br>
with)?<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
--Zack<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
cobbler mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cobbler@lists.fedorahosted.org">cobbler@lists.fedorahosted.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler" target="_blank">https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>