Comment 5 for bug 1945225

> I like the idea of the kernel command line argument because it is easy to apply and consistent across install types.

I agree the kernel boot param is absolutely easier, especially in the context of maas.

TL;DR from me is: I think it's at least worth looking at using a link file, or some other simpler method for this specific situation/hardware; if that's significantly more work and/or more complex, I'm +1 on this MR.

For more detail; my main objection to the MR is 2 things:

1) it would (in very limited situations) change the interface naming for anyone who is manually setting net-naming to 'latest' (which can be done either with a boot param, or editing the env var used by systemd-udevd). Why would anyone manually set that? I don't know for sure, since it is (and as you say, has long been) the default for ubuntu builds of systemd, but of course that's exactly the requirement for anyone to actually use the change introduced by the MR, so it's possible.

2) it doesn't actually fix this for anyone currently experiencing the problem; they would have to know about this change, and then take the extra step of manually setting the net-naming. So this really is a change that primarily benefits a very limited group of possibly affected users.

Note that I don't think #2 is necessarily a blocker; I've done exactly that before, e.g. bug 304393. I do think your backport of the v247 naming scheme is the best way to handle this *if* there is no other way to address it (that isn't significantly more painful).