On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:32:30PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 18.05.11 09:03, Ludwig Nussel (ludwig.nussel@xxxxxxx) wrote:
>
> > > > > Might be a good idea to just ignore these kinds of settings. Or if this
> > > > > is not possible, then set them from NM or whatever controls the network.
> > > >
> > > > That's that hack that's currently in place. Network scripts grep
> > > > /etc/sysctl.conf for interface specific settings...
> > >
> > > Urks. What we could do to make this nicer is add a simple prefix match
> > > logic to our sysctl apply tool, so that it is easy to apply a subtree of
> > > sysctls when the time comes.
> >
> > I've sent a patch to the procps maintainer but he has yet to
> > respond. It's not a real solution anyways. It just makes a dirty
> > hack a little more efficient.
>
> Note that systemd does not use the procps' implementation of sysctl, but
> our own one since the upstream version does not support /etc/sysctl.d/
> or anything like this.
procps project has been forked, ML:
http://www.freelists.org/list/procps
The upstream is active and maintained by people from Fedora, Suse
and Debian. So, it would be better to contribute to this project
than maintain and distribute systemd specific stuff... :-)
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
