Hi Laurent On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 18:44:40 +0100 Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> wrote:
On Wed, 04 Sep 2024 at 18:09:55 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > As I said, I prefer if systemd is built with -Ddefault-mdns=no as we have > avahi which provides this kind of functionaliy and (experienced) users that > want that kind of functionality from resolved can opt-in and enable it > easily. > One package (silently) disabling functionality of another package feels > wrong to me.I agree, it would seem strange to me to make avahi-daemon install a systemd-resolved configuration snippet that disables sd-resolved's mDNS support: that seems like a strange "action at a distance". > Should one day, systemd-resolved supplant/replace avahi, then this a > different story. But we are not there yet. All of Michael's reasoning makes sense to me. I assume Fedora had similar reasoning for why they're already doing what Michael is suggesting we do in Debian. We have lots of packages that make use of Avahi APIs specifically, and would not get equivalent functionality from sd-resolved (e.g. cups, gvfs-backends, samba). If at some future date we are in a position to remove Avahi from ordinary desktop installations, have sd-resolved installed by default, and somehow make sd-resolved responsible for the whole mDNS feature area, then that would be fine; but my impression is that this is not (yet?) the case. mDNS has two sides, resolving (getent hosts foo.local) and publishing (advertising myhost.local and "My Service"._something._tcp.local to the local network). Is there anything in systemd that intends to take over the publishing side from Avahi, or is it only the resolving side?
It seems we reached an impasse here but I also think this should be addressed for trixie.
Laurent, would you be open to raise this with the CTTE? Michael
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
