Re: future of sysctls?

[Lennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>]

On Wed, 18.05.11 09:03, Ludwig Nussel (ludwig.nussel@suse.de) wrote:

> > > > Might be a good idea to just ignore these kinds of settings. Or if this
> > > > is not possible, then set them from NM or whatever controls the network.
> > > 
> > > That's that hack that's currently in place. Network scripts grep
> > > /etc/sysctl.conf for interface specific settings...
> > 
> > Urks. What we could do to make this nicer is add a simple prefix match
> > logic to our sysctl apply tool, so that it is easy to apply a subtree of
> > sysctls when the time comes.
> 
> I've sent a patch to the procps maintainer but he has yet to
> respond. It's not a real solution anyways. It just makes a dirty
> hack a little more efficient.

Note that systemd does not use the procps' implementation of sysctl, but
our own one since the upstream version does not support /etc/sysctl.d/
or anything like this.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.