Re: [tlug] Um, so... systemd?

[Scott Robbins <scottro@example.com>]

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 05:47:24PM +0900, Curt Sampson wrote:
> On 2017-01-20 03:15 -0500 (Fri), Scott Robbins wrote:
> 
> 
> > Thank you, you corrected two bits of incorrect knowledge on my part.
> 
> Cool. Though I should mention that the `NM_CONTROLLED=false` thing is
> really good to know about for those of us who do have NetworkManager
> running on some systems yet still sometimes prefer to have a second
> interface for experimentation that NetworkManager doesn't touch. (I
> knew how to do this on Debian via `/etc/network/interfaces`, which BTW
> is a way nicer configuration mechanism than the Red Hat way, but I
> didn't know how to do it in Red Hat.)

I agree--though I know the RH way better, because I use it more, I think
Debian does networking better.  (In my case, though, I'll admit this is
subjective. Maybe because I use RH systems more, they break more for me.  
(Though, as an example, an update this week, if one has or had docker
installed, broke ssh on non standard ports if one has SELinux in enforcing
mode. But that's the sort of thing I probably wouldn't come across in
Debian, because I don't use it that much and by the time I ran an update on
some VM or seldom used laptop with Debian, it would have been fixed.

-- 
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6