From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA84138E66 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 22:00:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8370AE0AE6; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 22:00:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-la0-f49.google.com (mail-la0-f49.google.com [209.85.215.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5054BE0AD5 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 22:00:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-la0-f49.google.com with SMTP id mc6so21486lab.22 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:00:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=i/1eNrbNvFeOnwCsuyOh1RjVTcrgn5tFnfsnH0tY36Y=; b=Tf7GIAsZymkP9+QN6Qt/Ao7BdHEH3GlFelLNAYhbMxgpz+pbrYiFjTvLNxROWb59qS SV5K4+Zr39aANT73m2Ei5d4cfdeRE7vxfmIO3JSjyol0eonvBQrl96ryxgoO16AiSDJc SdqpCY9kCKNpZRrouKcaZOiyFAfdo35R84OYv6z7IV6bjFQR1tojLDlPDUQlhkcEfjE9 kwP6gzj76iAAQ/5Vl6RXU8OXCowH0WSOASMu38FNv+SxJVi5L9uf/dnPvS6XXSoE53Vq kSHJVTqVHxcg2u5aXSoSPxsReHNk78JIpNu73RXtQoed90jDH8gdmbzHfBwROZW8OCW/ QXCQ== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.129.168 with SMTP id nx8mr1055604lbb.37.1393365642104; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:00:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.170.67 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:00:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.170.67 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:00:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <07d8cf1108b4a5d52cdf81cb51db1887.squirrel@192.168.151.11> <2cdf6b0bc8fddc60282b693e360bb2d3.squirrel@192.168.151.11> <20140225113833.GB3992@sabayon.logifi> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:00:41 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: technical review of systemd From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2FuZWsgUGVsw6FleiBWYWxkw6lz?= To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b343d6823d59704f3423833 X-Archives-Salt: 1fa63b1b-4c61-4405-bdcd-7013efc7462b X-Archives-Hash: bcacfcfb630553e0ce706a03c4473529 --047d7b343d6823d59704f3423833 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Feb 25, 2014 10:40 AM, "Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s" wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > > [snip] > > > The way systemd services handle network whatever "network manager" you > > enable is the last thing preventing me from using systemd on servers. > > Seting up manual advanced setups on systemd looks crappy (if even > > possible with the provided tools) compared to OpenRC. > > > > Notice that iproute2 is the default everywhere for long time, here. > > > > The OpenRC comprehensive configuration set for network management is > > actually what I would expect in systemd. > > Perhaps they are starting small? I don't know; from what I've read, > they want something small for simple cases, and if you need more you > can use NetworkManager, connman, iproute2, or whatever. > > But then you had to configure it yourself. > > [snip] > > >> And, by the way, someone make me notice that netctl is an Arch'ism, > >> and that the command-line front-end for networkd is actually > >> networkctl. > > > > Yes, it was taken from Arch in order to allow better network support fo= r > > advanced configurations whitout requiring to write yet another tool. > > Nothing was taken from Arch, I believe. networkctl and netctl had > nothing to do with each other. > > > The thing is that I would expect systemd to handle the whole thing on > > its own (with the help of iproute2) so that services have nice > > grain-level dependencies. > > If someone writes support for this and convinces the systemd > maintainers that is a good idea, I think they would accept the > patches. BTW, here is an overview of networkd by its author: https://coreos.com/blog/intro-to-systemd-networkd/ Regards. --047d7b343d6823d59704f3423833 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Feb 25, 2014 10:40 AM, "Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9= s" <caneko@gmail.com> wr= ote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Nicolas Sebrecht <nsebrecht@piing.fr> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > The way systemd services handle network whatever "network ma= nager" you
> > enable is the last thing preventing me from using systemd on serv= ers.
> > Seting up manual advanced setups on systemd looks crappy (if even=
> > possible with the provided tools) compared to OpenRC.
> >
> > Notice that iproute2 is the default everywhere for long time, her= e.
> >
> > The OpenRC comprehensive configuration set for network management= is
> > actually what I would expect in systemd.
>
> Perhaps they are starting small? I don't know; from what I've = read,
> they want something small for simple cases, and if you need more you > can use NetworkManager, connman, iproute2, or whatever.
>
> But then you had to configure it yourself.
>
> [snip]
>
> >> And, by the way, someone make me notice that netctl is an Arc= h'ism,
> >> and that the command-line front-end for networkd is actually<= br> > >> networkctl.
> >
> > Yes, it was taken from Arch in order to allow better network supp= ort for
> > advanced configurations whitout requiring to write yet another to= ol.
>
> Nothing was taken from Arch, I believe. networkctl and netctl had
> nothing to do with each other.
>
> > The thing is that I would expect systemd to handle the whole thin= g on
> > its own (with the help of iproute2) so that services have nice > > grain-level dependencies.
>
> If someone writes support for this and convinces the systemd
> maintainers that is a good idea, I think they would accept the
> patches.

BTW, here is an overview of networkd by its author:

https://coreos.com/blog/intro-to-systemd-networkd/

Regards.

--047d7b343d6823d59704f3423833--