Re: updating ifupdown conflicts with systemd
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 08:25:45 +0000
Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 16:59:19 +0300
> Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 13:31:30 +0100
> > Maciej Wołoszyn <m.woloszyn@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > > On my Stretch system updating ifupdown conflicts with systemd.
> > > > I removed ifupdown.
> > > > I got network problems (no loopback) so I wanted to reinstall
> > > > ifupdown, with no luck.
> > >
> > > In my case, aptitude suggested removing ifupdown and replacing
> > > it by ifupdown2 ('ifupdown rewritten in Python').
> > > I did it, and lost networking after reboot (no loopback, no eth0).
> > > However, 'ifup -a' started both lo and eth0.
> > > (I have static IP defined for eth0 in /etc/network/interfaces,
> > > and don't use network manager)
> >
> > This may or may not be somewhat off-topic (or is this the same
> > issue?). Anyway, over the past few days, I have noticed that upon
> > apt-get dist-upgrade, ifupdown is always held back. When I force an
> > ifupdown upgrade with apt-get install ifupdown, it wants to remove
> > hundreds of packages, including most of the MATE desktop
> > environment. I am running Stretch (which I somewhat regret now).
> > Are others experiencing this?
> >
> > Needless to say, I decided not to upgrade ifupdown due to this.
> >
>
> This happened in unstable some time ago, and the jam cleared two days
> ago. Things generally appear in testing about ten days after unstable,
> if no complete disaster occurs, but Mr Biebl has told us the new
> systemd is due in testing around Saturday.
>
Excellent. Unlike OP, no disaster occurred due to my caution.
Reply to: