On Mo, 31.01.22 20:13, Thomas HUMMEL (thomas.hum...@pasteur.fr) wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm successully using systemd with some non trivial (for me!) unit
> dependencies including some performing:
>
> custom local disk formatting and mounting at boot
> additionnal nics configuration by running
My question was that silly ? ;-)
--
Thomas HUMMEL
Given that interfaces can come and go, does network.target imply that
all possible interfaces are up? Or does it just mean that the
infrastructure is there for DHCP-capable interfaces to begin searching
for an address?
--On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 11:52 AM +0100 Lennart Poettering
wrote:
Yes, rsyslog.service should definitely not pull in network.target. (I
am not sure why a syslog implementation would bother with
network.target at all, neither Wants= nor After= really makes any
sense. i.e. if people want
On Di, 15.02.22 17:30, Thomas HUMMEL (thomas.hum...@pasteur.fr) wrote:
> > > Also, it seems that there are more than one way to pull in a passive
> > > dependency (or maybe several providers which can "publish" it). Like for
> > > instance network-pre.target wich is pulled in by both
On Di, 15.02.22 08:46, Kenneth Porter (sh...@sewingwitch.com) wrote:
> --On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 11:52 AM +0100 Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
>
> > Yes, rsyslog.service should definitely not pull in network.target. (I
> > am not sure why a syslog implementation would bother with
> >
On 15/02/2022 11:52, Lennart Poettering wrote:
a) a passive target "does" nothing and serves only as an ordering checkpoint
b) an active target "does" actually something
Yes, you could see it that way.
Hello, thanks for your answer.
Yes, rsyslog.service should definitely not pull in
On Di, 15.02.22 09:14, Kenneth Porter (sh...@sewingwitch.com) wrote:
> Given that interfaces can come and go, does network.target imply that all
> possible interfaces are up?
No, totally and absolutely not. It's only very vaguely defined what
reaching network.target at boot actually means.
On 15/02/2022 11:52, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Yes, rsyslog.service should definitely not pull in network.target.
Thinking again about it after digesting what's been said in this thread
would it be correct to say that what's "wrong" for rsyslog *pulling* the
network.target passive target
Situation:
Many packages in a distribution ship with a default configuration that is not
considered 'secure'.
Hardening guidelines are available for all major distributions. Each is a
little different.
Many configuration suggestions are common-sense among security-conscious
administrators,
On 15/02/2022 18:13, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Di, 15.02.22 17:30, Thomas HUMMEL (thomas.hum...@pasteur.fr) wrote:
A passive unit is a sync point that should be pulled in by the service
that actually needs it to operate correctly. hence: ask the question whether
networkd/NetworkManager
11 matches
Mail list logo
