[arch-projects] [netctl] netctl, cloud-init, and systemd

[Erich Eckner]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi,

- --- snip ---

> In case you are not familiar with cloud-init, the idea is that you can
> build a single OS image that runs cloud-init on boot, and cloud-init
> will take care of such things as network configuration, so that the same
> image will work regardless of the network setup you choose for the cloud
> instance.

Does cloud-init run before or after systemd? In other words: is it a
systemd unit of some kind or is it rather an init daemon itself which
chain-loads systemd?

> The current cloud-init implementation for Arch uses netctl [3]. The
> implementation is correct in such a way that it does indeed render the
> right netctl profile(s) and enables them. However there is a problem:
> they are not being started. AFAICT this is because cloud-init does this
> while the systemd boot is already in process, and changing the
> dependency graph (by adding new units) does not have any effect until
> the next run (everything works right on second boot). Note that I even
> tried having cloud-init run `systemd daemon-reload` after enabling the
> units, but it didn't help either.

Did you try cloud-init to issue "systemctl start $unitname.service" 
additionally to "systemctl enable $unitname.service"? This seems to me to 
be the right way.

>
> The reason I am posting this here is that this seems to be an issue due
> to the particular way netctl use systemd units. Since you don't know the
> names or the number of profiles (units) that will be generated during
> image creation, you cannot enable them at that time. But doing so during
> first boot does not seem to work.

I would rather say it's due to the way, cloud-init uses systemd units: it
enables them, but that's only relevant for successive boots, so it should
rather enable and start them (systemd should still honor the dependencies
of the units and postpone the start to the point where all of the
dependencies are loaded, too).

>
> Just for comparison, if one were to use e.g. systemd-networkd instead,
> you would just enable the systemd-networkd unit during image creation,
> cloud-init could generate the appropriate config for any number of
> devices, and when the unit starts it will do the right thing. Likewise
> on other distros, e.g. Debian with /etc/network/interfaces or such.
>
> Now, from my point of view, there could be several approaches to solve
this:
>
> 1. systemd supports updates of the dep graph during boot
> 2. support such a use case in netctl
> 3. change cloud-init to use systemd-networkd for Arch
>
> Let me quickly elaborate:
>
> 1. is intentionally not phrased as something to be done. It might
> already be a thing, I just couldn't figure out how to do it. If someone
> knows more about this, I would love to hear about it. If this works, it
> would be the easiest solution. However, if it doesn't, I don't have my
> hopes up high for this being added to systemd anytime soon.

This would mean, if I "systemctl enable $some.service", it will be started
right away, too - probably not, what systemd devs want (at least it's
not, what systemd currently does).

>
> 2. is the main reason I am writing this. Things that came to mind were
> another special unit (netctl-all?), or even just a well-defined
> interface to write devices into the state file, so that the plain netctl
> unit would work. I would be very interested to hear how such a thing
> sounds to you, the developers?

There is currently netctl-auto at .service, but this requires to know the
interfaces in advance. Maybe the netctl devs can consider adding another
unit which is interface agnostic? "netctl-auto.service" maybe? (I'm not 
familiar with netctl's interna - maybe this is not possible at all)

>
> 3. Is of course an option, but would require quite a bit of work in
> cloud-init. That work, if done right, might however at some point
> benefit other distros, should they be using systemd-networkd as well.
> The main reason I am also bringing this up that I was wondering if there
> are possibly any plans to abandon netctl anyways at some point in favor
> of distro-agnostic solutions (be it systemd-networkd or any other).
>
> So, sorry for the long mail, but I probably omitted a few crucial
> details already, so don't hesitate to ask for clarifications :)
>
> I would love to hear your thoughts on this!
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Conrad
>
> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/cloud-init/
> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/growpart/
> [3] https://git.launchpad.net/cloud-init/tree/cloudinit/distros/arch.py
>

regards,
Erich

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=hfPB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----