Now that I read the initial debconf note three times I think I know what the difference between "yes" and "no" is. But "Do you want LXD to setup a network bridge for you?" does not encourage me to select "no", and the default is "yes" too.
But "yes" leads you into this trap of having to specify all those gory details manually. OTOH, saying "no" and using lxcbr0 works on my laptop, but in a fresh cloud image the question about which existing bridge to use defaults to "lxdbr0", and if I select that nothing happens because lxdbr0 does not actually exist. But there is no error message in debconf either to say "this bridge does not exist". May I suggest to structure this differently? The first question should be something like "Do you want to set up a bridge for LXD with default parameters? If you say "no" here, you can enter the IP configuration of the bridge manually", default to "yes", and do what lxcbr0 always used to. There can even be some checks if a 10.0.3.0/24 network already exists, and it can pick 10.0.4.0/24. And only if you select the non- default "no" you can then enter all those gory details. These should still have default values for what lxcbr0 used to have, so that you have something to start from. Particularly it should generate a valid IPv6 address. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567440 Title: debconf for bridge configuration is confusing and too complicated To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxd/+bug/1567440/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
