On Fri 01 Sep 2023 at 21:57:39 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 08:40:43PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > I know you have a low opinion of allow-hotplug, but I can't see that > > auto/allow-auto is necessarily better for the naive user that doesn't > > install a DE for whatever reason. > > > > AIUI auto gives you a one-shot attempt to start the network at boot > > time, and if that fails for any reason (eg USB not yet plugged in/ > > not detected/hardblocked on/etc), you get a long timeout before the > > login prompt, and may have to reboot to get it to attempt again. > > > > OTOH allow-hotplug gets you to a login prompt as normal, without the > > network being up, and then rectifying the problem makes ifupdown/udev > > automatically have another go. > > It depends on the hardware, and how the system is going to be used. > A built-in ethernet interface SHOULD NOT be configured as "allow-hotplug". > It should be "auto". I'd argue that the same applies to a PCI card or > other non-built-in but internal device. If you have to take the machine > apart to remove the device, it's "auto". > > allow-hotplug is intended for things like USB ethernet interfaces, as > you mention. They're literally hot-pluggable, and may not be present > when the system is booted. If you're dealing with one of those, then > by all means, use allow-hotplug for it. That's what it's for.
I think you have to include laptops, where the wifi might be built-in but might not be switched on/unblocked at boot time. I have a laptop with a (toggling) hard blocker. If the AC power has been disconnected (the battery is flat), it boots up blocked, so I know to press the toggle just /once/. If I can't remember whether it's been disconnected or not, then I don't know whether to press the toggle. Having auto specified in /e/n/i would make each boot a gamble. > My gripe is that the installer has (traditionally?) used allow-hotplug for > ALL ethernet interfaces, including the built-in interfaces on a server. > This causes massive problems with the ordering of service initializations > at boot. It took me a *long* time and a lot of digging to figure out why > things were breaking, so I try to pass that knowledge along for others. Fair enough, but I feel that setting a default that suits the naive user with a simple one-machine setup might have weighted the choice made by the d-i team. (I'm not sure how one divines an intent to set up a "server" BTW.) Obviously I don't know what specific things broke in your case, but I wouldn't call the OP's system a simple setup. Cheers, David.
