In recent Debian instances I have seen that the file /etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf is a syslink to /etc/sysctl.conf.
Why was the decision made to link the custom conf file back to the sysctl.conf file? What was the reasoning behind this?
I am not saying that is a good or bad thing. I am not saying it should be changed. I am not challenging this. All I want to know or understand is that why was this design choice made?
The reason that I ask this is because if the custom file, i.e. 99-sysctl.conf, is linked back to sysctl.conf then whatever changes in kernel parameters that we make will be overwritten. Typically the standard /etc/sysctl.conf file should not be edited, rather changes made is files kept in the /etc/sysctl.d directory. This helps to determine root causes of the issue.
I know that this refers to SysInit initialization and not SystemD init.
Why was the decision made to link the custom conf file back to the sysctl.conf file? What was the reasoning behind this?
I am not saying that is a good or bad thing. I am not saying it should be changed. I am not challenging this. All I want to know or understand is that why was this design choice made?
The reason that I ask this is because if the custom file, i.e. 99-sysctl.conf, is linked back to sysctl.conf then whatever changes in kernel parameters that we make will be overwritten. Typically the standard /etc/sysctl.conf file should not be edited, rather changes made is files kept in the /etc/sysctl.d directory. This helps to determine root causes of the issue.
I know that this refers to SysInit initialization and not SystemD init.
Statistics: Posted by DebianFox — 2024-06-11 08:40