Discussing this with Foundations we concluded ifupdown should not only lock "per-interface" basis, but it should have also a way of creating an hierarchy of interfaces (which locking the master one would imply in all slaves to be locked also - for vlan, aliases, bridging, etc) so in a possible parallel execution ifupdown would obey those restrictions and configure interfaces in a proper order - guaranteeing locking.
I'm preparing those changes and I'll suggest them upstream. If they get accepted I'll provide SRUs for precise and trusty. If SRUs or upstream code proposal are not accepted I may created a parallel ifupdown package being maintained by me to address those issues.
Discussing this with Foundations we concluded ifupdown should not only lock "per-interface" basis, but it should have also a way of creating an hierarchy of interfaces (which locking the master one would imply in all slaves to be locked also - for vlan, aliases, bridging, etc) so in a possible parallel execution ifupdown would obey those restrictions and configure interfaces in a proper order - guaranteeing locking.
I'm preparing those changes and I'll suggest them upstream. If they get accepted I'll provide SRUs for precise and trusty. If SRUs or upstream code proposal are not accepted I may created a parallel ifupdown package being maintained by me to address those issues.
Thank you.. Coming back to this soon.