Re: systemd: some more questions
Tom H writes:
It took me a bit of time to gather the informations I needed. I can bet that
this did not disturb you.
The good thing (at least for me :)) is that systemd + systemd-sysv
make the new system a drop-in replacement. Sometimes other issues are
more important that boot speed.
> > /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules
> > Also, Debian patches udev to only enable the new naming scheme
> > when booting with net.ifnames=1.
I asked Marco D'Itri about the naming of the network cards. He told me
he's unsure they'll have the time to maintain the old naming, since
Red Hat does not want to mantain it.
Therefore if you succeed to upgrade to a new distribution with
dist-upgrade you are safe. If you reinstall / and /usr or migrate
something you wrote for previous versions to new installation, you
have to deal with the naming change.
> > (AFAIK this has nothing at all to do with systemd, other than udev
> > sharing its git repository and a certian amount of FUD possibly going on.)
AFAIK udev is part of systemd
> Can you guarantee that Debian won't adopt "=1" by default by the time
> jessie freezes?
It's C code... :) :) :) :) Not likely to change from 0 to 1 ... :)
> Can you guarantee that people won't keep on saying "systemd/udev are
> gping to break your networking becuase they're going to change your
> nic names"?
Changing nic names could break network scripts, all the scripts that
assume that the network interfaces are named in a certain way.
You have none of them? Good, you can write "relax & enjoy" for this
part of your migration plan. Otherwise you have to plan a fix for this.
Incidentally it breaks the script I wrote for myself for dealing with
different fixed-network configuration in my work laptop :), but
nothing some line of shell scripting and Emacs Lisp can't fix almost
automatically.
One laptop is a nuisance, several tens of server is another issue.
That's for what could/will happen.
As for my personal opinion, the change of the network names by Red Hat
is a case of unnecessary ibiemmitis and the Debian decision to move to
systemd, at least this quickly, is bad, not this bad as I feared. Glad
for being partially wrong on this issue, Mr. Short S. Manager will
think that is good because Red Hat did the same and will not stop
Random J. Hacker to use Debian.
Reply to: