[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#860368: installer: create network bridges by default?

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 01:32:59PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> On 15/04/17 13:27, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 01:18:52PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >> As you describe, the default network is an extra layer of NAT.  It
> >> works, but not everybody wants that.
> > 
> > So those who don't want it can fix their bloody configuration.
> > 
> > Are you honestly suggesting that we should create unnecessary fluff for
> > all our users just because NAT doesn't work for a small minority of our
> > users?
> > 
> There are separate questions about
>   (a) whether it can be an option (not default), or

There are many many many pieces of software in Debian which work better
or allow you to do more if you change some system-wide configuration.
For instance, Samba will work better as a server if you install and
enable nss_winbind; and there are a number of web applications which
work better if you enable particular apache modules.

If we were to add options for all of those things in the installer, then
we'd end up with an installer you couldn't use anymore.

>   (b) whether it would be a useful default

I don't think so.

> > It's always possible to create a bridge manually, there's no need to do
> > that from the installer; and NAT works out of the box (virt-manager will
> > even suggest you enable the default network if you try to use it and it
> > hasn't been enabled yet).
> It isn't so hard to do manually, but every person who wants this needs
> to go and find out the necessary changes and edit /etc/network/interfaces

Yes, that's how it works, generally.

If you want to make that easier, nobody's stopping you from documenting
it, or submitting a patch to virt-manager to help with making the
necessary changes. But the installer isn't involved with
virtualisation, and therefore I think it doesn't make sense to make
those changes there.

> There is also the inconvenience factor: people have to bounce their
> interface or reboot when making a change like that.  If the bridge is
> already there we save them that inconvenience too.

This ignores the inconvenience factor for everyone who ends up with a
broken system because you added configuration which they don't need and
which conflicts with the things that they do need.

< ron> I mean, the main *practical* problem with C++, is there's like a dozen
       people in the world who think they really understand all of its rules,
       and pretty much all of them are just lying to themselves too.
 -- #debian-devel, OFTC, 2016-02-12

Reply to: