Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-17 Thread Martin Pitt
On Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:40:37 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 12:31:14PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > We should also think hard about switching to a new default since > > currently many other major distributions are moving to NetworkManager > > and/or systemd-networkd (which

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-03 Thread Roopa Prabhu
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:27 AM, Andrew Shadura wrote: > On 2 August 2016 at 08:47, Roopa Prabhu wrote: I also heard about some existing mailing list or discussions around solving ifupdown problems. We would like to be part of those discussions to see if ifupdown2 fits there.

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-03 Thread Andrew Shadura
On 2 August 2016 at 08:47, Roopa Prabhu wrote: >>> I also heard about some existing mailing list or discussions around solving >>> ifupdown >>> problems. We would like to be part of those discussions to see >>> if ifupdown2 fits there. >> >> I don't know of such a mailing list... but there's alwa

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-03 Thread Vincent Lefevre
On 2016-08-01 16:43:27 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > This seems reasonable. I think NM is a better choice than ifupdown for > roaming client devices (e.g. laptops), and systemd-networkd is a good > choice for "infrastructure" devices like servers and NAS boxes. I don't have any problem with ifupd

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Roopa Prabhu
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Guus Sliepen wrote: > On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 06:58:20PM -0700, Roopa Prabhu wrote: > >> And, we will be very happy to work towards making ifupdown2 >> the default in Debian. If there are ways to make that happen, please let us >> know. > > First, try to make it c

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Michael Biebl
Am 01.08.2016 um 12:48 schrieb Guus Sliepen: > I'd say a good starting point would be to try to switch the installer to > configuring NetworkManager or systemd-networkd, instead of generating a > /etc/network/interfaces file. It already does that if the network-manager packages is installed by d-i

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Marc Haber
On Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:42:39 +0200, m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote: >On Aug 01, Adam Borowski wrote: > >> > We should also think hard about switching to a new default since >> > currently many other major distributions are moving to NetworkManager >> > and/or systemd-networkd (which nowadays

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Marc Haber
On Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:48:26 +0200, Guus Sliepen wrote: >On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 12:31:14PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: >> We should also think hard about switching to a new default since >> currently many other major distributions are moving to NetworkManager >> and/or systemd-networkd (which now

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Lars Wirzenius
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 09:01:20PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Aug 01, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > > > > Sorry, what I actually meant was "every non-toy Debian system". > > we get that you have strong preferences. However, could you please > > avoid inflammatory language when talking about anythi

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Aug 01, Guus Sliepen wrote: > The time spent writing such a hypothetical tool would then be better > spent keeping support for ifupdown in the installer for the non-Linux > platforms. I agree: if the Hurd/kFreeBSD porters will be able to keep sysvinit on life support then continuing to use if

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Aug 01, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > > Sorry, what I actually meant was "every non-toy Debian system". > we get that you have strong preferences. However, could you please > avoid inflammatory language when talking about anything that isn't > according to your preferences? Reasonable people should

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Guus Sliepen
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 04:43:27PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > > Last time I looked at it, systemd-networkd required several > > configuration files just to bring up a single interface. > > What were the others, beyond the .network file? This is live configuration > from my home server, which

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Simon McVittie
On Mon, 01 Aug 2016 at 12:48:26 +0200, Guus Sliepen wrote: > Last time I looked at it, systemd-networkd required several > configuration files just to bring up a single interface. What were the others, beyond the .network file? This is live configuration from my home server, which has two network

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Simon McVittie
On Mon, 01 Aug 2016 at 12:40:37 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 12:31:14PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > We should also think hard about switching to a new default since > > currently many other major distributions are moving to NetworkManager > > and/or systemd-networkd (w

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Lars Wirzenius
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 12:42:39PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > Sorry, what I actually meant was "every non-toy Debian system". Marco, we get that you have strong preferences. However, could you please avoid inflammatory language when talking about anything that isn't according to your preference

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Adam Borowski
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 12:42:39PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Aug 01, Adam Borowski wrote: > > > > We should also think hard about switching to a new default since > > > currently many other major distributions are moving to NetworkManager > > > and/or systemd-networkd (which nowadays is u

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Guus Sliepen
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 12:31:14PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > We should also think hard about switching to a new default since > currently many other major distributions are moving to NetworkManager > and/or systemd-networkd (which nowadays is usable, works well for > simpler use cases and wi

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Aug 01, Adam Borowski wrote: > > We should also think hard about switching to a new default since > > currently many other major distributions are moving to NetworkManager > > and/or systemd-networkd (which nowadays is usable, works well for > > simpler use cases and will be installed on ev

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Adam Borowski
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 12:31:14PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Aug 01, Guus Sliepen wrote: > > > I see one big drawback of ifupdown2, and that is that it's written in > > Python. Nothing wrong with that language, but it means it pulls in > > dependencies which a minimal install currently does

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Aug 01, Guus Sliepen wrote: > I see one big drawback of ifupdown2, and that is that it's written in > Python. Nothing wrong with that language, but it means it pulls in > dependencies which a minimal install currently doesn't require, which is > not so nice for people running small VMs or embe

Re: ifupdown2: debconf followup

2016-08-01 Thread Guus Sliepen
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 06:58:20PM -0700, Roopa Prabhu wrote: > And, we will be very happy to work towards making ifupdown2 > the default in Debian. If there are ways to make that happen, please let us > know. First, try to make it compatible with 99% of the non-trivial ifupdown configurations.