Ugh, Netplan. WHY?

[Zarathustra[H]]

So,

Have any of you encountered this yet?

I've been partly through lack of time, and partly through old school preference keeping most of my servers on Ubuntu 14.04 for a long time now. (some are in 16.04) Support for this LTS seems to be ending in April of next year, so I have started thinking about upgrading them.

I was cautioned on the Ubuntu forums that in 18.04, networking has become very different, and to read up before doing the upgrade.

Apparently Ubuntu has moved away from the traditional ifupdown where you configure your devices in /etc/network/interfaces to this new abstraction layer called netplan.io, which uses something called YAML I have never heard of before, to configure it.

Maybe I'm a bit unusual, but I really LIKE ifupdown, and love configuring network manually in /etc/network/interfaces, and do so even on my desktops, disabling the GUI gnome network-manager that most distributions use these days for the desktop.

This all reminds me of back when everyone was moving away from simple text config files and replacing them with stupid xml files which are way less usable.

I'm going to go read up on how to configure neplan.io, but I am unhappy. I guess in 18.04, you can still remove netplan if you so prefer, and install ifupdown, but I wonder how long this will be an option now.

I wonder if it might be time to switch to Debian. They keep it old school right? I wonder if they too are getting on board with this netplan bullshit.


All I want is a distribution that uses ifupdown, and does not use systemd-resolved. Is that too much to ask? I'm all for change if it solves some major problem I have, but if it doesn't, I'd prefer everything to stay the same, forever.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

I can't help you solve your problem- seems a bit picky to me - however, I will say that learning to use YAML files would be productive.

I see them used pretty widely now.

 

[FNtastic]

You might find this useful/interesting. http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

Fact is, they're gonna move where there's developer support. So, if the developer for a package can't support anymore, and another developer or team can give support for a new package that claims to solve other issues at the same time, the distribution will likely move in the latter direction.

I fought systemd at first. I actually prefer it now. Had to configure a system on init the other day and it was much less useful...

I hate to say "get with the times". But, for ease of use, we have to go with what's available to us. You always have the option to modify or make your own distribution

Also, at least for now, you should be able to still use ifupdown in Ubuntu 18. https://askubuntu.com/questions/1031709/ubuntu-18-04-switch-back-to-etc-network-interfaces

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

You might find this useful/interesting. http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

Fact is, they're gonna move where there's developer support. So, if the developer for a package can't support anymore, and another developer or team can give support for a new package that claims to solve other issues at the same time, the distribution will likely move in the latter direction.

I fought systemd at first. I actually prefer it now. Had to configure a system on init the other day and it was much less useful...

I hate to say "get with the times". But, for ease of use, we have to go with what's available to us. You always have the option to modify or make your own distribution

Also, at least for now, you should be able to still use ifupdown in Ubuntu 18. https://askubuntu.com/questions/1031709/ubuntu-18-04-switch-back-to-etc-network-interfaces

I havent used an init system for a long time, but I am very happy with upstart, and very sad to see it replaced by systemd.

 

[B00nie]

Oh yeah, netplan is so incredibly annoying change. Debian hasn't been so conservative either since version 9 - they made pretty incredible changes compared to what they used to be.

 

[ChadD]

You could always run a non-systemd distro like Slackware. MX seems to be gaining some traction and is based on Debian stretch I believe Slack and MX are both SySV I believe.

Of course if your going that road BSD starts looking like a decent option as well.

 

[Mazzspeed]

Every time I consider upgrading from 16.04 some odd decision regarding 18.04 stops me. I really wish Canonical would stop trying to reinvent the wheel....

 

[tbg]

It has been a while, but i believe i just did:
# apt-get install ifupdown
# apt-get remove netplan.io

there was some annoying bug where netplan wasn't bringing up a virtual interface for me on boot. Though if you arn't doing anything strange i thought the netplan .yml files in /etc/netplan are pretty nice once you get use to them. I have been doing a lot of ansible lately so yml files are not to bad.

 

[Mazzspeed]

It has been a while, but i believe i just did:
# apt-get install ifupdown
# apt-get remove netplan.io

there was some annoying bug where netplan wasn't bringing up a virtual interface for me on boot. Though if you arn't doing anything strange i thought the netplan .yml files in /etc/netplan are pretty nice once you get use to them. I have been doing a lot of ansible lately so yml files are not to bad.

Great tip, thanks tbg!

 

[Lunar]

So, linux.com did a good write-up last month that was a pretty nice explanation of how to use netplan. Link

I really wish Canonical would stop trying to reinvent the wheel....

With the exception of Netplan, what exactly has Canonical done in 18.04 that's different from all the other major distros? Also, I'm not trying to be snarky here. I'm legitimately curious, because what I've seen so far is that 18.04 was actually more of a course correct in which Canonical brought Ubuntu more inline with the rest of the industry. They killed off most of their custom crap that was unnecessary (Unity, upstart, mir, etc) and got in line with the industry.

I havent used an init system for a long time, but I am very happy with upstart, and very sad to see it replaced by systemd.

Well, upstart was a Canonical specific init system that never got widespread adoption, and frankly I'm glad that they shifted to systemd considering that it's effectively the industry standard at this point. Only a few distros use SysV, OpenRC, or runit at this point. If you want to stay up to speed with where the industry is going then getting comfortable with systemd is pretty much vital.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

So, linux.com did a good write-up last month that was a pretty nice explanation of how to use netplan. Link


With the exception of Netplan, what exactly has Canonical done in 18.04 that's different from all the other major distros? Also, I'm not trying to be snarky here. I'm legitimately curious, because what I've seen so far is that 18.04 was actually more of a course correct in which Canonical brought Ubuntu more inline with the rest of the industry. They killed off most of their custom crap that was unnecessary (Unity, upstart, mir, etc) and got in line with the industry.


Well, upstart was a Canonical specific init system that never got widespread adoption, and frankly I'm glad that they shifted to systemd considering that it's effectively the industry standard at this point. Only a few distros use SysV, OpenRC, or runit at this point. If you want to stay up to speed with where the industry is going then getting comfortable with systemd is pretty much vital.

Honestly, I don't see why it has to "go" anywhere.

On the server side, I found 14.04 LTS to be more or less perfect. No need to ever change anything. Patch for security issues, keep up with hardware compatibility and update the package repository, sure, but architecturally there was no need to change anything.

Every major change since has been a step backwards in my opinion.

On the desktop I felt differently. Unity was a hot mess and I hated it, but Mint with it's choice of Cinnamon and Mate were pretty much perfect there, somewhere around the 16-17 release.

Additions of such garbage as systemd, gnomes network-manager and gnomes wannabe windows registry gconf are massive leaps backwards.

What I like about Linux was it's lightweight simplicity. Configure everything in a simple static text file from console, none of that GUI garbage.

I feel like they are hell-bent on filling it with bloat like systemd and useless GUI configuration tools in order to try to out-windows windows, when the reason I use Linux is because I don't like windows.

 

[Mazzspeed]

So, linux.com did a good write-up last month that was a pretty nice explanation of how to use netplan. Link


With the exception of Netplan, what exactly has Canonical done in 18.04 that's different from all the other major distros? Also, I'm not trying to be snarky here. I'm legitimately curious, because what I've seen so far is that 18.04 was actually more of a course correct in which Canonical brought Ubuntu more inline with the rest of the industry. They killed off most of their custom crap that was unnecessary (Unity, upstart, mir, etc) and got in line with the industry.


Well, upstart was a Canonical specific init system that never got widespread adoption, and frankly I'm glad that they shifted to systemd considering that it's effectively the industry standard at this point. Only a few distros use SysV, OpenRC, or runit at this point. If you want to stay up to speed with where the industry is going then getting comfortable with systemd is pretty much vital.

The underlying issue is that what Canonical are doing goes against the UNIX/Linux policy of 'do one thing and do it right'. I admit, I don't mind systemd, but all this change for the sake of change just seems a little unnecessary?

 

[IdiotInCharge]

What I like about Linux was it's lightweight simplicity. Configure everything in a simple static text file from console, none of that GUI garbage.

I feel like they are hell-bent on filling it with bloat like systemd and useless GUI configuration tools in order to try to out-windows windows, when the reason I use Linux is because I don't like windows.

There's going to be some snark apparent here; it's not intended, but I'm warning beforehand because I know that I can't say what I want while keeping the impression of snark completely out .

Basically, I hope that the major Linux distros continue to push the dual interface channel- that is, putting in console-based controls in parallel with GUI controls.

Surprisingly, Microsoft has done a decent job of doing the same, to the point that administering a headless server via Powershell over SSH is actually a thing like we do with Linux. And I think that is is a good thing for both because it opens up possibilities for both.

One being that if a user would like, they can simply turn the GUI crap off! And for many server scenarios, especially with the push past virtualization toward containerization, this make a whole lot of sense.

The other being that user interfaces other than the traditional mouse and keyboard gain in importance. Tablets and phones are by no means optimal, but they are ubiquitous, and touch really needs a GUI to be efficient.

And I do mean that with respect to servers. Here in the first-world, we're cool with mouse and keyboard, or just keyboard- in other places, a phone may be all they have as an interface. My overall point is that distros should try to enable the potential range of access vectors, even if they don't develop all completely in parallel.

 

[Lunar]

The underlying issue is that what Canonical are doing goes against the UNIX/Linux policy of 'do one thing and do it right'. I admit, I don't mind systemd, but all this change for the sake of change just seems a little unnecessary?

I would argue that it isn't change for change sake. Systemd has become the standard like it or not, and I personally think it was a necessary change. SysV init was great way back when Unix only had about 6 services to run at startup, but as systems become more complex, a better method of managing the system services is needed. Systemd is the answer to that problem. I don't buy the argument that it does too much and violates Unix philosophy. It does one thing really well, and that one thing is manage running services. When my plex service starts, systemd isn't doing anything more than starting it and monitoring it's status.

Systemd also provides a standardized way of starting services as opposed to relying on startup scripts which, in my opinion, introduces unnecessary requirements on the developers. I'd rather the Plex devs be able to focus on making a great media server than have to worry about whether or not their init script works perfectly and can handle error catching, etc. Each service having its own startup script also introduces another point of failure.

What I like about Linux was it's lightweight simplicity. Configure everything in a simple static text file from console, none of that GUI garbage.

I feel like they are hell-bent on filling it with bloat like systemd and useless GUI configuration tools in order to try to out-windows windows, when the reason I use Linux is because I don't like windows.

I get that people don't like change, but this whole idea of never change anything is frankly absurd. If nothing ever changed, then we'd all still be using computers running CP/M or DOS. No thanks. I'm with you in that I love being able to administer the system via the command line, but I also like having GUI options for when I'm feeling a bit lazy. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but since when has Canonical or any other distro made a change that prevents managing the system from the command line? Not to be a snarky ass or anything, but your statement really feels a bit hyperbolic and not representative of the actual state of Linux systems today. Sure they've added GUI controls and so on, but all of the underlying console configuration is still there.

Also, you can't really blame Ubuntu for adopting gconf. That's frankly a pretty weak statement. They use gconf because they use Gnome. Kinda comes with the territory. Don't like gconf? Well, I hear KDE has got a nice desktop. Don't go and use cinnamon or mate though, because they use gconf (mateconf for mate) too. Not to mention that gconf has been around since Gnome 2, so I don't really get the issue. It's not like it's a new thing.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that technology changes, and you kinda just have to deal with it. SysV has largely been remanded to a deprecated state in Linux at this point, so you're gonna have to either learn systemd or switch to one of the BSD's. The one complaint I've seen in this thread that actually has merit as an attack on Canonical is netplan. Yeah, it's kinda unnecessary, it adds to fragmentation issues, and I don't really see the advantage to it. Other than that, I see a bunch of arguments that either have no basis in reality, or are just unfair jabs. Canonical went back to being a downstream distro that contributes upstream again in 18.04, something that the Linux community has wanted them to do for years now, and that's somehow a bad thing?

 

[B00nie]

I just build dockers on Alpine nowadays.