Simon McVittie left as an exercise for the reader: > I was using "desktop" in the sense of task-gnome-desktop and friends, more > than as a class of hardware. Laptops and other portable computers are the > main thing that really needs easily user-configurable networking. > I think it makes sense for desktop/workstation hardware to be treated like > an oddly-shaped laptop by default, which means it gets the benefit of the > wider testing that goes into NM and its various user interfaces, rather > than having laptops and desktops behave differently for reasons that are > unlikely to be obvious to a new user. since sending that mail, i've looked into gnome, and it seems to have pretty deep integration with NM. given gnome's positioning in debian, that seems to satisfy my question in and of itself. it's clearly at a level well above wpa_gui etc. (which i don't use, but might have proffered for consideration). thanks as always for your detailed and thoughtful mails. > A secondary benefit of NM is that it works on non-systemd-booted systems, > whereas systemd-networkd isn't designed for that use. I'm personally > happy with systemd as pid 1, but some people consider requiring systemd > as pid 1 to be a deal-breaker, and if NM is a good candidate for being > our default *anyway* then we might as well get that secondary benefit too. i hadn't even considered this, thanks. one nice thing about systemd-networkd is that it's pretty extensive in terms of structured configurability; i've currently got two machines with "CombinedChannels 1" to run XDP programs which bind to queue 0, for instance. of course, these are advanced options and thus can assume non-default effort. -- nick black -=- https://www.nick-black.com to make an apple pie from scratch, you need first invent a universe.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature