Hi Christian, On 11/04/18 15:15, Christian Hesse wrote: > Antonio Quartulli <a...@unstable.cc> on Fri, 2018/04/06 15:43: >> Two new files, namely networking_sitnl.c and networking_ip.c, provides >> two implementations for this API: one uses the new sitnl code (netlink) >> and one uses iproute2. > > This complicates the situation for my followup code: Running the process with > unprivileged user works with netlink interface only. If we want to support > netlink and iproute2 we end up with creating the files from templates (or > carry static files in at least two versions).
Keeping support for iproute2 is part of our agreement during the discussion at the last hackathon. Some of the reasons might be summarized in the hackathon page on the wiki. Therefore, we need to find a way to deal with that. > > This kicks into the discussion we had about supporting newer systemd features > selectively... Shipping different static files for distributions and/or > systemd versions duplicates the number of files. > I am not into systemd, therefore I am not able to comment on the strategy we need to adopt. However, what I imagine is that each distribution, when deciding what library to use (sitnl vs iproute2), will also decide which of the provided unit files to ship (if we have multiple precompiled files). Or our Makefile should generate the right ones based on the --enable-iproute2 switch (maybe this is what you meant with templates?). Cheers, -- Antonio Quartulli
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ Openvpn-devel mailing list Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
