Re: New systemd
Dnia 2014-07-03, czw o godzinie 11:01 +0200, Jacek Konieczny pisze:
> On 03/07/14 10:30, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> >> networkd probably should not be enabled by default if the network is
> >> already configured PLD-way, but otherwise it is good to have it.
> >> I think it could be a good idea to use it by default when there is no
> >> other network configuration. There is a change it will 'just work' in
> >> the most common scenarios. We cannot provide this with our rc-scripts.
> >
> > That's some solution, but consider new install, where networkd will be
> > enabled and then admin wants to make some changes to the NIC setup only
> > to find out it doesn't work. We need a simple way for networkd to
> > disable itself or our network scripts to disable it when needed.
>
> I guess networkd has some facilities for interaction with NetworkManager
> (one should probably disable the other), maybe that could be reused for
> rc-scripts too. Our 'ifup', when used with our ifcfg file could just
> tell networkd 'ignore this interface from now on' or something. When
> there is no ifcfg file, then ifup/ifdown could be just another interface
> to networkd.
>
> > Or we could just enable networkd by default on new/unconfigured installs
> > and put a big information-warning in our scripts what to do when someone
> > wants to use them instead of networkd.
>
networkd in last versions does automatic configuration on new interfaces
only for containers created with systemd-nspawn
normally it needs to have {systemd_dir}/network/whatever.network .netdev
files, thus it lives quite happy with our rc-scripts (dunno NM but I
presume similar)
215 works well on my kvm machines, have not tested yet baremetal...
regards
Tomasz Rutkowski
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
network configuration subsystems (was: New systemd)
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 09:17:52AM +0200, Jacek Konieczny wrote: > We could, of course, try to fix rc-scripts with more and more > shell hacking (still trying to keep backward-compatibility), > but why force us to maintain that, when there are other, > simple, tested and maintained solutions. Well you might be interested in /etc/net -- it's mature to the point it needs minor to no maintenance, even the website has been closed by its original author several years ago; here's the git: http://git.altlinux.org/gears/e/etcnet.git?p=etcnet.git;a=tree;f=docs;hb=HEAD Basically built from ground up around modern Linux kernel networking capabilities and corresponding userspace tools. ALT specific, portable (I've heard of a Gentoo package and router use with a pile of physical interfaces, there was a failed Fedora proposal too: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/195365). Coexists with NM and connman just fine over here. -- WBR, Michael Shigorin / http://altlinux.org -- http://opennet.ru / http://anna-news.info ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: New systemd
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 11:40:51AM +0200, Mariusz Mazur wrote: > Are there any reasons not to upgrade to 214? We've had quite considerable PITA with its sysvinit related changes, JFYI. On the positive side, 214 looks to be the fastest starter/halter for my ALT-based regular livecds (those of the set based on sysvinit, that is). -- WBR, Michael Shigorin / http://altlinux.org -- http://opennet.ru / http://anna-news.info ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
