Those messages were quite confusing. In particular "adding address" suggests
that we are assiging a new address to an interface, but in fact we're just
reacting to a notification about an addition. So let's call that "remembering"
and "forgetting". It's not fully gramatically correct, but I think it's much
clearer than "adding"/"removing" in this context.
And "received address without address" is too cryptic, let's say "address
message" to distinguish the message from its content.
Also, make failure to format address non-fatal, and print more details in
various places.
This is for 6d36464065. It turns out that this is causing more problems than
expected. Let's retroactively introduce naming scheme v241 to conditionalize
this change.
Follow-up for #12792 and 6d36464065. See also
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1136600.
$ SYSTEMD_LOG_LEVEL=debug NET_NAMING_SCHEME=v240 build/udevadm test-builtin net_setup_link /sys/class/net/br11
$ SYSTEMD_LOG_LEVEL=debug NET_NAMING_SCHEME=v241 build/udevadm test-builtin net_setup_link /sys/class/net/br11
...
@@ -20,11 +20,13 @@
link_config: could not set ethtool features for br11
Could not set offload features of br11: Operation not permitted
br11: Device has name_assign_type=3
-Using interface naming scheme 'v240'.
+Using interface naming scheme 'v241'.
br11: Policy *keep*: keeping existing userspace name
br11: Device has addr_assign_type=1
-br11: No stable identifying information found
-br11: Could not generate persistent MAC: No data available
+br11: Using "br11" as stable identifying information
+br11: Using generated persistent MAC address
+Could not set Alias=, MACAddress= or MTU= on br11: Operation not permitted
+br11: Could not apply link config, ignoring: Operation not permitted
Unload module index
Unloaded link configuration context.
ID_NET_DRIVER=bridge
Previously, when a bridge or bonding interface is in degraded-carrier
state, then we cannot judge the interface has addresses or not.
By using the new states, dbus clients can distinguish such situation.
Otherwise, the interface cannot be in "configured" state, as ipv6 link local
addressing is enabled by default. Note that even if ConfigureWithoutCarrier=
is set, all dynamic configurations are checked when the interface has
carrier.
When object A is stored in Manager::rules and B is in ::rules_foreign,
and compare function for the object cannot distinguish them,
then freeing A causes B to be removed from rules_foreign or vice versa.
Hopefully fixes#12731.
If we query older networked, they will be missing. This is not an error.
Also, make the error more informative, because the bus error itself might
be just "Unknown interface or property" which is not enough to understand
what is going on.
