Bug#809171: Please handle network device hotplug events (move from udev)

[Martin Pitt]

Hello Guus,

Guus Sliepen [2015-12-27 23:11 +0100]:
> >  * An udev rule which reacts to adding or removing network devices.
> >    This is currently shipped as /lib/udev/rules.d/80-networking.rules
> >    but I propose that ifupdown ships it as
> >    /lib/udev/rules.d/80-ifupdown.rules to avoid a package file
> >    conflict and also to make it clearer that this applies to ifupdown
> >    only. I attach this as 80-ifupdown.rules.
> 
> I think we can also keep it as it is and use Replaces and Breaks
> headers in the control file. Each has its drawbacks. If there is both
> 80-networking.rules and 80-ifupdown.rules, it seems to me like the
> ifupdown script will be called twice for each hotplug event. But I agree
> it will be clearer if it is called 80-ifupdown.rules.

Right, as we'll need a Breaks: between versions anyway it's fine to
rename it. These are not conffiles either. Also, the called script
is robust against being called several times, so if that happens
during the package upgrade it's fine.

> Ok, that's basically just a copy of /lib/udev/net.agent. Why was
> /lib/udev/hotplug.functions pasted into it instead of sourced?

In order to make the migration easier, I eliminated hotplug.functions
from udev yesterday and pasted the relevant parts into net.agent:

  http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-systemd/systemd.git/commit/?id=018671ca10a

net.agent was the only thing that still used hotplug.functions, and
there's no point carrying this around further -- it's better for udev
helpers to be self-contained if they move to other binary packages.

> Ok, so we'll have a file conflict in any case.

Yes, unless we rename ifup at .service to something like
ifupdown at .service, or if-device at .service. Then we could even run the
two versions side by side. But as it's a bit of a waste to run both,
and people may have gotten used to/depending on ifup at .service, I think
it's cleaner to just keep the name and do that lockstep transition if
that's alright with you.

> I can do this in the next release of ifupdown (0.8.5). I'll need to
> know which version of the udev package to sync with.

How about this: When you upload this, you add a Breaks:/Replaces: udev
(<< current version + 1~) and notify me on this bug, and I'll remove
the above files from udev right away in git (I'll prepare and stash
that right now). If you plan to do it in the next days you can use
228-3~ (we want to upload that RSN anyway and the dpkg upload that
Michael was waiting one apparently happened now). I didn't commit that
yet as I wanted to ask you first and wait for a possible discussion.

Thank you!

Martin
-- 
Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-systemd-maintainers/attachments/20151228/cd90d46a/attachment-0002.sig>