On 11/04/18 19:50, David Sommerseth wrote:
> But in the end, I believe that currently it is probably better to have a
> simple shell script doing the generation.
Unless we have to create something quite complex (not the case here)
that needs further extensions in the future (probably not
On 11/04/18 09:43, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
>> 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
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 03:43:11PM +0800, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> 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).
This is how I
On 11/04/18 15:15, Christian Hesse wrote:
> Antonio Quartulli 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.
Antonio Quartulli 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