Bug#931371: marked as done (release-notes: Advice as to migration from legacy network interface names)
Your message dated Wed, 3 Jul 2019 20:54:30 +0100
with message-id <03072019201431.8ede77574068@desktop.copernicus.org.uk>
and subject line Re: Bug#931371: release-notes: Advice as to migration from legacy network interface names
has caused the Debian Bug report #931371,
regarding release-notes: Advice as to migration from legacy network interface names
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
931371: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931371
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release-notes
Severity: normal
I have upgraded two systems having 70-persistent-net.rules. In both
cases the ethernet interfaces remained at eth0. It appears to me that
warning of losing networking after the upgrade to buster is a little
over the top.
Does #919390 offer any relevant guidance?
Regards,
Brian.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed 03 Jul 2019 at 12:05:02 +0100, Brian Potkin wrote:
> I have upgraded two systems having 70-persistent-net.rules. In both
> cases the ethernet interfaces remained at eth0. It appears to me that
> warning of losing networking after the upgrade to buster is a little
> over the top.
>
> Does #919390 offer any relevant guidance?
In the light of the discussion at
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-systemd-maintainers/2019-July/039145.html
I am closing this report with a comment or two:
1. I reported a bug against the Release Notes for buster, not
buster+1. What may or may not happen in bullseye is of little
relevance.
2. https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-systemd-maintainers/2019-July/039151.html
is a better expression of the situation. There is no guarantee
the upgrade will leave networking intact; that is what needs to
be conveyed to a user. It's a "better safe than sorry" approach.
"We do not know what will happen but, trust us, do as we say".
3. A link to Micheal's first response could be given in the Notes
to emphasise the possible gravity of not following the advice.
4. Just remove the whole section. The situation is no different from
a jessie-stretch upgrade and there have been no reported bugs
involving 70-persistent-net.rules. I imagine there is no momentum
for that.
Regards,
Brian.
--- End Message ---
Reply to: