Interesting, I'm going to have to look into this.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Billings" <billings@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "centos" <centos@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 8:32:49 AM
Subject: Re: OT: systemd Poll
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 08:02:56AM -0500, Leroy Tennison wrote:
> This does concern me, another post referred to the heavy-handed way
> in which systemd has been implemented and I totally agree. "You
> will conform" - no exceptions. What I fear is that we will lose the
> ability to control the name, MAC address association at some future
> point because "no one needs to do that" (speaking from their ivory
> tower).
To be honest, if you use systemd-networkd (instead of NM or the network init
script), you can arbitrarily name your interfaces whatever you want, in a much
more configuration-management-friendly way.
It's just that systemd-networkd isn't that well-known yet. I'm on the fence
about whether I like it or not. It is nice that its really simple files and
consistent across distros, but it doesn't yet do stuff like wifi well. Also,
most GNOME desktops have a NM applet that gets confused if you're using
systemd-networkd. I still feel like systemd-networkd is a lot less
convoluted than NetworkManager.
https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-networkd.service.html
--
Jonathan Billings <billings@xxxxxxxxxx>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
