Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-08 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Sun, 07.12.14 14:37, Tom Gundersen (t...@jklm.no) wrote: Hi David, We may want to introduce a mechanism for installed, but not enabled configuration snippets, but we haven't quite figured it out yet. In the meantime, you can give your files a custom suffix or keep them in a sub

Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-08 Thread Mantas Mikulėnas
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net wrote: Yeah, I think we should just suggest people to rename files they want to disable. We should probably recommend a convention though, for example .disabled as suffix. We should recommend the convention simply

Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-08 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mon, 08.12.14 18:55, Mantas Mikulėnas (graw...@gmail.com) wrote: On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net wrote: Yeah, I think we should just suggest people to rename files they want to disable. We should probably recommend a convention though, for

Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-07 Thread Tom Gundersen
Hi David, We may want to introduce a mechanism for installed, but not enabled configuration snippets, but we haven't quite figured it out yet. In the meantime, you can give your files a custom suffix or keep them in a sub directory, then either move or symlink to enable. This is likely how the

[systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-04 Thread O Neill, David M
Folks, I would like to introduce a flag enable=Boolean in the networkd configuration files. I am introducing new features that can create a large amount of configuration. Deleting and restoring configuration can be quiet laborious Renaming the files to another extension is possibly another

Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-04 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 12/04/2014 03:47 PM, O Neill, David M wrote: What do you think? I think this should be consisted with other unit enablement in systemd not handled by introducing a new enabled/disabled flag JBG ___ systemd-devel mailing list

Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-04 Thread O Neill, David M
Thanks! -Original Message- From: systemd-devel [mailto:systemd-devel-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Jóhann B. Guðmundsson Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 3:55 PM To: systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state On 12/04/2014 03:47

Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-04 Thread Brendan Hide
On 2014/12/04 17:54, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 12/04/2014 03:47 PM, O Neill, David M wrote: What do you think? I think this should be consisted with other unit enablement in systemd not handled by introducing a new enabled/disabled flag I think the idea has some merit. But I also

Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-04 Thread O Neill, David M
: Thursday, December 4, 2014 4:06 PM To: 'Jóhann B. Guðmundsson'; systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: RE: [systemd-devel] networkd link state Thanks! -Original Message- From: systemd-devel [mailto:systemd-devel-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Jóhann B. Guðmundsson Sent

Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-04 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 12/04/2014 04:36 PM, Brendan Hide wrote: On 2014/12/04 17:54, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 12/04/2014 03:47 PM, O Neill, David M wrote: What do you think? I think this should be consisted with other unit enablement in systemd not handled by introducing a new enabled/disabled flag I

Re: [systemd-devel] networkd link state

2014-12-04 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Thu, 04.12.14 16:53, O Neill, David M (david.m.one...@intel.com) wrote: Jóhann/All, If you could expand on how you solve the following: Systemd-networkd is a single process and it reads its configuration from /etc/systemd/network. How do unit files, solve a single process managing