Simon McVittie wrote: > I don't think ifupdown has been "Debian's native tool" for several years > now. It is one among several available tools, and happens to be the only > one with Debian as its upstream; on a wheezy-era sysvinit system that > uses NetworkManager, the only thing ifupdown does for you is to bring up > lo, and on a systemd system even that is unnecessary.
NetworkManager will bring up lo if not already up, so you don't need ifupdown for that either. See https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=580309 and https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=625427 . > One thing that an adopter could very usefully do with ifupdown would be > to coordinate with the systemd maintainers on moving net.agent > (Debian-specific udev glue to invoke ifupdown) from udev into ifupdown, > so that it does not need to be present at all on systems that rely on a > non-ifupdown tool like NM. That would also mean that the ifupdown > maintainer would be free to alter the precise details of how net.agent > and ifupdown interact, since they would now control both ends of the "API". I'd *love* to see that happen. I've seen discussions about that, and they always seemed to stall out. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150527233144.GA1178@jtriplet-mobl1
