Agreed: either it's drop-in compatible or we may as well switch the
default to NM and/or systemd-networkd.
Well, here's a heretical thought: why don't we do that anyway, at least for new
installations?
On Tue, 09 Jul 2024 at 10:57:39 +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
   Agreed: either it's drop-in compatible or we may as well switch
the
   default to NM and/or systemd-networkd.
Well, here's a heretical thought: why don't we do that anyway, at
least for new
installations?
To some extent, we are already there: for new laptop/desktop
installations, NM is already the default (certainly true for GNOME,
and hopefully for most/all of the other tasksel-supported desktops).
For new server/embedded installations, I think networkd would be a
better default than ifupdown [....]
yes please, I would love to see Debian switch from ifupdown to
NM/networkd. ifupdown was the perfect tool for the time it was created
in, but things have advanced, and imho now is a good time to switch.
On Tue, 09 Jul 2024 at 10:57:39 +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Agreed: either it's drop-in compatible or we may as well switch the
default to NM and/or systemd-networkd.
Well, here's a heretical thought: why don't we do that anyway, at least for new
installations?
... See my recent mail about how we should probably not be inventing Debian-specific container frameworks that will end up with one overworked maintainer being a single point of failure for the distribution, but
replace "container framework" with "network management tool" and the
same ideas are equally valid. Like Podman in the containers space, NM
and systemd-networkd both have the advantage of being used outside the
Debian bubble, sharing the responsibility for their continued existence
among *considerably* more people.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 486 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 144:55:40 |
Calls: | 9,659 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 13,708 |
Messages: | 6,167,848 |