ti 9. heinäk. 2024 klo 11.58 Daniel Gröber (d...@darkboxed.org) kirjoitti: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 09:26:50AM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > > su 7. heinäk. 2024 klo 16.56 Daniel Gröber (d...@darkboxed.org) kirjoitti: > > > For me the reason to work on ifupdown-ng is that it has a better core > > > design, clean&modern code, an active upstream community, a ***test > > > suite*** > > > and the potential to fully replace ifupdown without breaking anyone's > > > system doing it. Full compatibility is not there yet. I'm working on it, > > > see [1] but I'm optimistic so far. > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/ifupdown-ng/ifupdown-ng/issues/247 > > > > I just had a look at ifupdown-ng. The /etc/network/interface syntax > > is not a drop-in replacement for ifupdown. That's a big no-no. Those > > "use dhcp" have to go. > > Not reading the documentation carefully is a bigger no-no :) > > For legacy configurations statements "use" is optional: > > > If the auto_executor_selection ifupdown-ng.conf option is enabled, use > > statements will automatically be added for executors when their > > config‐ > > uration statements are present in the interfaces file.
Which is not a drop-in substitute. It depends upon a configuratiomn option. > The idea being that your config should declare the "executor" scripts it > needs, a good thing IMO. No. > That being said I'm sure there are a couple of dark corners where > ifupdown-ng is not yet compatible that I haven't noticed yet, but this > isn't one of them. > > Please note that the examples in the manpages are in what upstream > considers the "proper new way" of doing things, they don't show the legacy > way (also a good thing), you may have to read the code to get the full > picture. Do let me know if any legacy-format behavioural > reference-documentation is missing though. Claiming to offer a drop-in substitute all while nudging people towards a new paradigm is not welcome. > Since I only just realised people may now actually want to try out > ifupdown-ng: You can co-install it with traditional ifupdown with > --no-install-recommends, the ifupdown-ng-compat package is the one that > conflicts: ifupdown. ifupdown-ng itself doesn't. > > Use ifup-ng/ifdown-ng, check dpkg -L for manpages some are named *-ng some > aren't. Executors have their own interfaces-* manpage eg. > interfaces-bridge(5). Which again shows that this is not a drop-in substitute. Martin-Éric
