F21 System Wide Change: Smaller Cloud Image Footprint
mitr at volny.cz
Thu Apr 17 20:27:06 UTC 2014
2014-04-17 21:54 GMT+02:00 Matthew Miller <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 09:47:21PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > > (NetworkManager and initscripts) and one that's available but not used
> > > default anywhere (systemd-networkd). This would simply swap the status
> > > systemd-networkd and initscripts.
> > Is NetworkManager already at the *100% complete* feature parity that
> > make this possible? (Keeping in mind that "possible" and "a good idea"
> > still not the same...)
> I don't think I accept your premise here. 100% (possibly spread between
> networkd and NetworkManager) would be necessary for dropping initscripts
> completely, but that's not being proposed.
You were arguing that we would be going from 2 used + 1 unused systems to a
different set of 2 used + 1 unused; for that to happen, users of
initscripts must have somewhere to migrate to.
> > It is _largely_ the case that complex networking is done outside of the
> > > guests and presented to the guests as simple interfaces. Usually that's
> > > one device with DHCP, but there may be additional interfaces with DHCP
> > > or static interfaces.
> > Well, this particular possibility is strictly black/white—either the
> > completely different configuration and API is exposed, or it isn't; if
> > there are any alternatives to configure at all, it is exposed.
> Not following you.
As a background, I *really* don't want the fragmentation; I don't see the
benefits, and I very much see the costs. In the original mail I have tried
to outline a scenario in which there would "technically" be fragmentation,
but only in a setup that users would never touch so it would be
"invisible". But as soon as this is something users need to interact with,
it's no longer "invisible" and we are in the, for me undesirable, full
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel