3 ms·
Backport, because all the needed statements are not there. I use strace etc (and debug level in networkd), but then you realise that this should make it easier
by isodude 7y ago
Backport, because all the needed statements are not there.
I use strace etc (and debug level in networkd), but then you realise that this should make it easier not tougher. I did learn about ifup -v though which gave me all I needed. But both tools silently ignores flags that is wrong.
I'm writing my own tool now that is more strict in that sense instead.
Sorry about the rant but it's at least three trips to get everything working flawless in systemd-networkd now..
- pas 7y agoWhen it comes to Linux networking I find that tooling is very, very, veery bad, compared to what it should/could be. Of course it's free and open source, so we can at least try to make it better besides complaining, but that part is harder than it should be (otherwise the whole problem would have been "solved" by now).
- isodude 7y agoTotally agree. I find network management bad wherever you go. Systemd-networkd is fine layout wise, it's just the tooling that could be improved upon. Also here you see the problem with systemd-networkd being shipped together with systemd deb, if it were to be standalone it would be so easy to backport just that.
- isodude 7y agoAnd I just realised that it should not be that hard to control the interface via dbus to networkd. Coreos even made a complete systemctl dbus integration.