Michael Biebl wrote:
> aipark <aip...@outlook.com> wrote:
>> I updated a staging bookworm VM with VirtIO NIC to trixie and
>> temporarily lost network access because enp6s18 became ens18,
[...]
>
> So, for a remote system where you don't want the naming scheme to change,
> would it make sense to add a recommendation to pin it to the systemd version
> the system was originally installed with?
>
> Say for a bookworm system, you add "net.naming_scheme=v252" to the kernel
> command line.
> Then you can dist-upgrade and boot into your new trixie system (including
> the new kernel).
>
> And at a later point, you can decide to bump net.naming_scheme to v257 at a
> more opportune time.
I could understand it if you were suggesting that any server accessed
via the net should have a .link file. But this pinning approach seems
a strange strategy for the maintainers to be recommending.
Users who know that a specific upgrade is about to rename their
network interfaces don't have a problem; they can just arrange to
switch over to the new name (for instance by defining both in
/etc/network/interfaces).
So this recommendation only really makes any sense if the idea is that
*everybody* who cares about having reliable networking should keep
this bodge in place from now on.
And if this is the official canonical way of getting predictable names
out of the predictable names mechanism, why does systemd even *have*
new versions of the naming scheme?
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
