Re: systemd

[Roger Leigh <rleigh@codelibre.net>]

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 07:22:50AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> 
> > Believing what I read at Arch-general mailing list, configuring systemd
> > will be in some kind of irrational secret language.
> 
> An example:
> [Unit]
> Description=[u] Static Interface [%I]
> StopWhenUnneeded=true
> Wants=network.target
> Before=network.target
> BindTo=sys-subsystem-net-devices-%i.device
> After=sys-subsystem-net-devices-%i.device
> After=basic.target

So this is a standard INI-style configuration format.  It's used
by a lot of software since it's clear and simple.

> I see that %I is supposed to stand for eth0; how do I connect this
> with eth0?

Don't know about this specific case, but presumably it's a generic
template which can be resused for multiple network interfaces.

systemd has lots of legitimate criticisms, but its configuration
file format is not one of them.  A straightforward declarative
format is vastly more robust and maintainable than a motley
collection of imperative shell scripts.  There's simply no
argument on that point.  If we could use the same (or a subset)
of the format in sysvinit, I'd certainly look at that.


Regards,
Roger

-- 
  .''`.  Roger Leigh
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux    http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
 `. `'   schroot and sbuild  http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools
   `-    GPG Public Key      F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800