On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 8:38 AM Martin-Éric Racine <martin-eric.rac...@iki.fi> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 1:10 AM Noah Meyerhans <no...@debian.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 08:27:10PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > > On Feb 22, Noah Meyerhans <no...@debian.org> wrote: > > > > > > > For servers, the ideal situation is somewhat less clear, but there was > > > > at least some interest in using systemd-networkd (with or without > > > > netplan). > > > Why even consider netplan, I wonder? > > > > It's not something I'm interested in, but there were some arguments made > > in favor of it in the earlier thread. > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2021/09/msg00410.html > > On the plus side, netplan uses a centralized configuration file just > as /etc/network/interface currently does. On the minus side, YAML > really makes for cluttered config files. I don't like it. > > I tried networkd. It comes with the same problem as all of systemd: > every tiniest thing is expected to have its own unit file; there is no > centralized /etc/network/interface and no support for WPA. It sucks. > > NM works well on laptops via GNOME's NM applet, but is a PITA for > everything else. > > Personally, I'd migrate dhclient to dhcpcd5. NM already has a dhcpcd5 > backend, as indicated in #964947 by Michael Biebel. > > Integrating bridge-utils into ifupdown and uniformizing the > configuration syntax would also be desirable.
As mentioned in Bug #964947, I have a dhcpcd5 NMU waiting on Mentors. Martin-Éric
