On 13 October 2014 21:52, Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> wrote:
However, that page does indicate that systemd has no expressed rational reason for integrating networkd.
Maybe because the alternatives have serious problems in certain use cases? e.g. ifupdown easily gets confused as to what state the interface is in, and network-manager has a lot of unnecessary overhead for server use. I have no problems with people wanting to make things better. If you don't want to use system-networkd however, you can continue using one of the alternatives. I think network-manager will be a better solution for desktops/laptops, for example, as I suspect system-networkd may not have the GUI interface network-manager does (I haven't checked that recently though). -- Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>