Hi,
On Tue, 2024-07-16 at 15:23 +0200, Lukas Märdian wrote:
> On 16.07.24 15:05, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 13:13:16 +0200, Philip Hands wrote:
> >
> > > I suspect having something that's agnostic about the underlying
> > > implementation as our default would be rather better for the non-systemd
> > > options that people care about, …
> > > Also, networkd doesn't support non-Linux and non-systemd systems AFAIK,
If you want to explore alternatives, one can just start systemd-
networkd under sysvinit as well. I'm not sure how well that is
supported, but it worked when I tried for entertainment.
> > AFAICS, the netplan packages (netplan.io, netplan-generator) currently
> > have a hard dependency on systemd.
>
> That's true.
> Netplan functions as a [systemd-generator] at its core, so it will have the
> same limitations as sd-networkd. So ifupdown[-ng] would still be needed as a
> fallback for the non-systemd ports.
Uhh, how does it generate .network units for systemd-networkd then?
Note the paragraph stating
+---
| Note: generators must not write to other locations or otherwise
| make changes to system state.
+---[ man:systemd.generator(7) ]
from the man page you linked to. And none of
/run/systemd/generator{,.late,.early} seem like places to place
.network or .netdev units?
(And I wouldn't be surprised if systemd would start enforcing that,
just like they enabled a system-wide `ProtectSystem=` in initrd by
default which prevents writing to `/usr`.)
Ansgar
