From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B5337067D
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 14:51:30 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8B62637BD
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 14:51:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 14:51:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CC06543683
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 14:50:59 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 14:50:58 +0200
From: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
To: Oguz Bektas <o.bektas@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <20220722125058.vmdslo5zvisv5tcb@wobu-vie.proxmox.com>
References: <20220719112456.298086-1-o.bektas@proxmox.com>
 <1658231483.00qrznxz22.astroid@nora.none> <YtabimEy5PeG09tP@gaia>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <YtabimEy5PeG09tP@gaia>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.277 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH container] fix #4164: use DHCP=yes
 instead of DHCP=both in systemd-networkd config
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 12:51:30 -0000

On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 01:54:50PM +0200, Oguz Bektas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 01:52:37PM +0200, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> > On July 19, 2022 1:24 pm, Oguz Bektas wrote:
> > > "both" option is deprecated, this gets rid of the warning in the journal
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Oguz Bektas <o.bektas@proxmox.com>
> > 
> > some notion which templates you tested this with, when the deprecation 
> > happened in systemd, whether we need a fallback to 'both' for older 
> > versions, etc.pp. would be nice to have..
> > 
> > AFAICT the deprecation was in systemd v219, so should probably be okay 
> > to switch unconditionally..
> 
> yes, all our current templates are using the newer systemd versions, so
> no need for a fallback IMO.
> 
> i tested it with:
> * arch
> * fedora 35 and 36
> * ubuntu 20 and 22
> templates, it got rid of the warning in all of them.

Introduced in 2015 is old enough. Anybody using a container which
actually uses systemd-networkd *and* is that old will just have to
enable dhcp manually...

Applied.