On Jul 09, Simon Richter <s...@debian.org> wrote: > For a server installation, I absolutely need the option to configure a > static IP from d-i text mode interface or a preseed file, and this > configuration to be taken over into the installed system. I do not understand why you are explaining this as if it were some unusual requirement: it is quite common and indeed you can easily do it with both NM and systemd-networkd.
> That's my question, essentially: is this an interface with full support from > upstream, or something that may change in an incompatible way later that > will require us to deploy additional infrastructure to support? Multiple people, one of the systemd upstream maintainers among them, already told you that creating configuration files is a normal and fully supported interface. > The key feature of both sysvinit and ifupdown, from Debian's perspective, > has always been control: with sysvinit, there were no "upstream" > definitions, it was all defined by us as part of Debian Policy, and if we What you mean is that it has always been that they were basically abandoned upstream so there were no new features were coming that way and we had to implement in Debian everything that we needed. > So we need to weigh all the benefits of switching to systemd-networkd > against the drawback that we are again tying part of our system to an > externally defined release schedule, so we will need to nominate someone who But we switched to NM for Wi-Fi enabled systems and the sky has not fallen yet. -- ciao, Marco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
