On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 08:39:43PM -0500, Helmut K. C. Tessarek wrote: > This is my first mail in a Debian mailing list and I hope I've chosen the > correct one. There are way too many lists thus please direct me to the > correct one, in case I messed up.
As the matter is intersecting multiple packages, it isn't the worst choice. > In the last few days I ran into a serious issue when upgrading to newer > releases on 3 headless servers: the network connection went dead. > In the first situation the interface name changed from eth0 to end0 and > after the reboot my adapter got a link-local address. I am surprised to see this happen. Back in older times, interfaces used to be named like eth0, but that should not be happening since quite a number of stable releases. Those old systems that still use eth0 today tend to do it due to a file /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules. Does that exist and list your interface on the affected system? If not, can you try figuring out why it was still named eth0 before upgrading? In principle, I expect that this is an unusual circumstance and therefore do not think it is worth mitigating. > In the second situation dhcpcd was replaced by Network Manager and once > again the network was dead. Can you try figuring out what dependency caused Network Manager to be installed? Your apt or dpkg logs may be helpful here. > Both network "outages" could have been prevented by adding a note at the end > of the dist-upgrade output. There are two difficulties in this proposal. One is finding a responsible package for printing this note and the other is properly detecting the changed network interface name before doing the reboot that actually changes it. As a result of these, I suggest investing time into making the described situations less likely rather than printing a warning. Helmut
