Systemd's Network Support Frustrating Some Users

[Nuc!eoN]

2. Why forcing those services on us by default, if we can enable them by default

Oops, sorry I meant: "Why forcing those services on us by default, if we can enable them manually".

[computerquip]

They're not forcing anything onto you because you can easily disable them.
They activate it by default probably because they believe more people will want it than more people will not want it.

[Skrapion]

Oops, sorry I meant: "Why forcing those services on us by default, if we can enable them manually".

There's a good argument to be made that having the Alsa service enabled by default is against The Arch Way, but that would be an Arch bug, not a systemd bug. Arch maintainers often have to turn off defaults in the software they package. Alsa and systemd are no different.

[computerquip]

Eh? Most Arch Linux packages just let the defaults flow. If extra configuration is needed, it's either done by yourself or via an extra package (see the pulseaudio-alsa package).

[DeepDayze]

So will systemd-networkd replace something like NetworkManager and will a UI or command(s) be provided to configure and manage the new daemon?

I would like to be able to disable the daemon easily if I don't want to use it so that it won't stomp all over NetworkManager (or what you use to manage your network connections)

[Skrapion]

Eh? Most Arch Linux packages just let the defaults flow. If extra configuration is needed, it's either done by yourself or via an extra package (see the pulseaudio-alsa package).

I'm very likely talking out of my ass here, but I thought I read somewhere that, unlike other distros, when you install a service on Arch you almost always have to manually enable it. But I've never actually run Arch myself, so please correct me if I'm wrong

[Scimmia]

I'm very likely talking out of my ass here, but I thought I read somewhere that, unlike other distros, when you install a service on Arch you almost always have to manually enable it. But I've never actually run Arch myself, so please correct me if I'm wrong

No, you're right, that is the standard procedure in Arch.

[Ericg]

So will systemd-networkd replace something like NetworkManager and will a UI or command(s) be provided to configure and manage the new daemon?

I would like to be able to disable the daemon easily if I don't want to use it so that it won't stomp all over NetworkManager (or what you use to manage your network connections)

systemd-networkd is NOT a NetworkManager replacement. Networkd is currently aimed at handling the issue of "I have a couple network devices that never change and nothing special with them ever happens." Like if you have a desktop with one ethernet port and you leave it plugged in 24/7/365 then NetworkManager is probably overkill for you.

And like many of us have already said, if you don't want it you probably don't have to do anything to disable it (most distros ship NetworkManager so they'll prob leave this disabled) but if for some reason it IS enabled and you don't want it to be enabled then you can just issue "systemctl disable systemd-networkd" like any other service and it will disable it

[Ericg]

No, you're right, that is the standard procedure in Arch.

(Not necessarily replying TO you Scimmia, just replying OFF OF you)

Its systemd standard procedure to ship the 'recommended configuration' which in this case meant networkd was enabled by default.
Its Arch standard procedure to ship packages in their default states.
Its also Arch standard procedure to ship services disabled by default.

In this case the last two points are in conflict with each other since one would violate the other. The Arch packager for systemd made a choice, whether it was accidentally or purposefully who knows, and that was 'leave systemd in its default config.' Which some people disagreed with, though I find it unlikely it would actually cause problems since networkd doesn't do anything until configured.

[computerquip]

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Packaging_Standards

And this is more or less just a guideline. Notice how there's nothing on what's enabled/disabled by default. This is done on a per-package basis simply to keep packaging sane. It does not make sense to disable or enable something just because "that's the Arch way" when it might be completely stupid for that particular package.

In the case of this, I wouldn't be surprised if it was left off. netctl has always been available but it's not meant to be a one-all solution and can easily be left alone and even removed. In the case of this, it seems to do the opposite and defaults to using a tool that may not be necessary. But hey, if most people end up wanting it on by default, it will probably be left on by default. There's nothing in "the Arch way" or packaging guidelines to say otherwise.