Re: Release Notes for buster: 70-persistent-net-rules still supported?
(Thanks to Andrei for coming up with a better revision than the draft
I was too slow with!)
Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 03.07.19 um 17:53 schrieb andreimpopescu@gmail.com:
>> Based on your comments I prepared the patch below (also attached for
>> convenience), that I could push anytime.
>>
>> diff --git a/en/issues.dbk b/en/issues.dbk
>> index 4769f9d6..c7634151 100644
>> --- a/en/issues.dbk
>> +++ b/en/issues.dbk
>> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ information mentioned in <xref linkend="morereading"/>.
>> the old-style network interface names that were deprecated with
>> stretch (such as <literal>eth0</literal> or <literal>wlan0</literal>),
>> you should be aware that <systemitem role="package">udev</systemitem>
>> - in buster no longer supports the mechanism of defining their names via
>> + in buster does not reliably support the mechanism of defining their names via
>
> I'd prefer if we rephrased that and declared the old naming scheme as
> officially unsupported in buster.
> It might still work under certain circumstances (not sure if it makes
> sense to go into detail here what those circumstances are) but users are
> strongly advised to migrate to the new naming scheme.
Maybe we need something like
you should be aware that <systemitem role="package">udev</systemitem>
upstream officially no longer supports the mechanism of defining their
names via <filename>/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules</filename>
(though this may continue to work for now in buster). To avoid the
danger of your machine losing networking, it is strongly recommended
that you migrate to the new
>> <filename>/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules</filename>. To
>> avoid the danger of your machine losing networking after the upgrade
>> to buster, it is recommended that you migrate in advance to the new
>> @@ -148,10 +148,11 @@ information mentioned in <xref linkend="morereading"/>.
>> </para>
>> <para>
>> The alternative is to switch to a supported mechanism for enforcing
>> - the old naming scheme, such as the <literal>net.ifname=0</literal>
>> - kernel commandline option or a systemd <filename>.link</filename>
>> - file (see <ulink
>> - url="https://manpages.debian.org/systemd.link";>systemd.link(5)</ulink>).
>> + the old naming scheme, such as a systemd <filename>.link</filename>
>
> As said, net.ifnames=0 does not enforce the old naming scheme, it means
> use the kernel provided names.
I don't follow. Surely the old naming scheme *is* to use the
kernel-provided names? Where did names like "eth0" come from if not
the kernel?
> If users want to stick with the kernel provided interfaces names, they
> should be aware that this is can lead to interfaces having different
> names on each boot if they have multiple interfaces.
Is this the same risk they're already running, or has it got worse
between stretch and buster?
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Reply to: