Bug#1101950: Please consider a configuration-only non-default package systemd-resolved-mdns

[Josh Triplett]

Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Hi Josh,
>
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 11:52:23AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>> That way, users whose configurations do want to use mDNS with
>> systemd-resolved could depend on `systemd-resolved-mdns` and have it
>> Just Work.
>
> That's an interesting idea. On the CTTE side, it was discussed whether
> systemd-resolved could Conflicts: avahi-daemon and that was ruled out
> rather early. I do not see how this would carry over to
> systemd-resolved-mdns though. There, that conflict would really make
> sense rather than breaking use cases.

That was exactly my hope.

> Or it could go one step further still and we could have both
> avahi-daemon and systemd-resolved-mdns declare Provides and Conflicts
> for a virtual mdns-resolver package for others to depend on.

I don't think a virtual package will work well, because there's no standard interface for publishing things via mdns. And for resolving, the only *standard* interface available is NSS, so that would be something to handle via the corresponding libnss packages rather than the daemons.

> The CTTE questioned whether avahi-daemon would be the default resolver
> in the long run, so this approach would also enable a way to eventually
> transition the functionality in a smooth way.
>
> I agree that this is all not urgent and we may defer it after trixie.
> Yet, it is an interesting way to think about the problem. Thank you.
> This is all my own views without a CTTE hat.

Much appreciated. I'm glad it helps.