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

[Curt Sampson <cjs@example.com>]

On 2017-01-20 03:15 -0500 (Fri), Scott Robbins wrote:

> This is a server-cum-desktop and as I'm looking, I see I'm mistaken. Thak
> you. What I do have though is NetworkManager-libnm.

Right. From the description, that's a library to help programs
communicate with NetworkManager, and `repoquery -l` indicates it's got
shared libs in it, such as `/usr/lib64/libnm.so.0`. (The `so` there
can be taken to mean "shared object".) Unless special work has been
done to make things otherwise, When a program is linked to a library
that library _must_ be present.

So how does this avoid a dependency on NetworkManager itself? Probably
these functions in the library just try to talk to NetworkManager via
dbus or something similar, essentially forming the client for a server
run by NetworkManager. Thus, if NetworkManager isn't running or can't
be talked to for some reason, the functions can just return something
indicating that and the program can carry on in whatever way is
suitable for a system without NetworkManager.

> 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.)

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson         <cjs@example.com>         +81 90 7737 2974

To iterate is human, to recurse divine.
    - L Peter Deutsch