Moving towards NetworkManager

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
69 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Josef Wolf
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 02:13:19PM +0200, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 29 July 2016 at 13:04, Josef Wolf <[hidden email]> wrote:

> This may not be directly relevant, and I don't use it myself, but...

This IS directly relevant!

> I track a number of non-GNOME-based distros via mailing lists, forums
> etc. A common question is avoiding NetworkManager, as it's a GNOME
> tool and pulls in various GNOME dependencies.

I started this thread because uninstalling network-manager removed all of my
desktop.

> (E.g. on Arch it
> requires the GNOME keyring merely to be able to _enter_ a Wifi
> password. Not to store it, just to enter it at all!)

I don't want any GUI to enter my wifi keys. They are stored in a svn
repository which is checked out by configuration scripts which in turn are run
by my postinstall script.

Therefore, right after install (by my customized CD), all my wifi-keys (and
ssh hostkeys, ssh authorized keys, and many, many other configuration aspects)
are configured.

No point in entering (and mis-typing) dozens of wifi-keys manually.

Works great with wpa-supplicant. If only NM did not get in the way.

Since NM is usseless (to me), I uninstalled it.

And it took my desktop along with it.

> The next-most-popular tool and replacement for NM seems to be WICD:

Another kid in town. No longer supported.

--
Josef Wolf
[hidden email]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Oliver Grawert
In reply to this post by Josef Wolf
hi,
On Fr, 2016-07-29 at 14:48 +0200, Josef Wolf wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 01:50:30PM +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
> >
> > looks more like an install time thing, i.e. a replacement for
> > netcfg in
> > debian-installer, the network bit in ubiquity, the cloud-init
> > network
> > configuration and snappys first boot network setup for embedded
> > systems. it seems to try to find a unified way for all the
> > different
> > install variants currently used in ubuntu.
>
> So after install, automated configuration systems will still have to
> cope with
> different ways to set up networking?
well, i assume you can always force a re-generation by the tool, but by
default you would use the networking tool config that your installation
prefers ... i could be totally off track here, you really have to ask
the developers :) 

>
> When writing this, I had networkd and NM in mind. I was not after
> netplan.
heh, sorry ... reflexes of an old ubuntu developer ... if someone says 
NIH i go into defensive mode and expect you refer to ubuntu development
... :)

>
> >
> > >
> > > BTW: Some years ago, network interfaces used to be called ethXX
> > > or
> > > wlanXX or ethXX.YY or something.
> > thats an invention of the systemd upstream people IIRC ...
> > https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetwor
> > kInterfaceNames/
>
> Looks like a fix of a non-existing problem, IMHO.
well, there seemingly are problems if you run linux on a virtual switch
with dynamically generated interfaces or special servers which use bios
names for devices or some such, i guess linux has grown into areas
where it had not been used before, it might not affect your desktop or
home server install but there might actually be usecases for it ...

this is like bringing support for 1024 partitions to the kernel, 90% of
linux users will never need such a feature, but it needs to be there
for ... well. supercomputing, big data mangement, massive cloud servers
or whatever.

(i find it super ugly as well, but i guess there were actual reasons to
invest worktime to implement it)

ciao
        oli
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

signature.asc (188 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by Josef Wolf
On 29 July 2016 at 15:08, Josef Wolf <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 02:13:19PM +0200, Liam Proven wrote:
>> On 29 July 2016 at 13:04, Josef Wolf <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> This may not be directly relevant, and I don't use it myself, but...
>
> This IS directly relevant!

OK, well, good. :-)

>> I track a number of non-GNOME-based distros via mailing lists, forums
>> etc. A common question is avoiding NetworkManager, as it's a GNOME
>> tool and pulls in various GNOME dependencies.
>
> I started this thread because uninstalling network-manager removed all of my
> desktop.
>
>> (E.g. on Arch it
>> requires the GNOME keyring merely to be able to _enter_ a Wifi
>> password. Not to store it, just to enter it at all!)
>
> I don't want any GUI to enter my wifi keys. They are stored in a svn
> repository which is checked out by configuration scripts which in turn are run
> by my postinstall script.

Jeez. Well, as discussed, I think you're mad. ;-) But hey, I am
entirely in favour of your right to run your own systems however you
want.

I still think, though, that given what you're saying, Ubuntu isn't the
right distro for you!

> Therefore, right after install (by my customized CD), all my wifi-keys (and
> ssh hostkeys, ssh authorized keys, and many, many other configuration aspects)
> are configured.
>
> No point in entering (and mis-typing) dozens of wifi-keys manually.
>
> Works great with wpa-supplicant. If only NM did not get in the way.

O_o

> Since NM is usseless (to me), I uninstalled it.
>
> And it took my desktop along with it.

You uninstalled it in a careless way, which is strongly at odds with
your apparent level of tech skills.

If you want to manage your own OS and desktop in detail, then a
highly-automated, highly-integrated distro and desktop such as Ubuntu
& Unity are not good choices for you, IMHO.

>> The  next-most-popular tool and replacement for NM seems to be WICD:
>
> Another kid in town. No longer supported.

Yes it is.

https://launchpad.net/wicd


--
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: [hidden email] • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: [hidden email] • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

interface renaming (was: Re: Moving towards NetworkManager)

Paul Smith-2
In reply to this post by Ralf Mardorf-2
On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 14:08 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> If you have several devices, or you connect and disconnect USB
> network devices, it's likely more tricky.

The real problem is trying to use things like puppet etc. to configure
lots of systems, if they all use arbitrary different names for eth0.

Especially if they all were configured to use eth0 before.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Ralf Mardorf-2
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:33:48 +0200, Liam Proven wrote:
>I still think, though, that given what you're saying, Ubuntu isn't the
>right distro for you!

Perhaps you're right, perhaps you're wrong with this claim. At least
network-manager is no reason to switch to another distro, I installed
Ubuntu from the 15.10 server install media and selected what I wanted
to install and what not. Later I run a release upgrade to 16.04 and
network-manager is not installed, just the dev package is installed:

$ sudo systemd-nspawn -q dpkg -l network-manager*
[snip]
un  network-manage <none>       <none>       (no description available)
ii  network-manage 1.2.0-0ubunt amd64        network management framework (dev
un  network-manage <none>       <none>       (no description available)
$ sudo systemd-nspawn -q dpkg -l network-manager-dev
[snip]
ii  network-manage 1.2.0-0ubunt amd64        network management framework (dev

There could be valid reasons to chose another distro, but IMO
network-manager is no reason to do so.

Regards,
Ralf

--
Death of ROXTerm
https://sourceforge.net/p/roxterm/discussion/422638/thread/60da6975/


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Ralf Mardorf-2
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:33:48 +0200, Liam Proven wrote:
>If you want to manage your own OS and desktop in detail, then a
>highly-automated, highly-integrated distro and desktop such as Ubuntu
>& Unity are not good choices for you, IMHO.

PS:

Indeed, but Ubuntu provides relatively minimalist install media too.
Since you mentioned Arch and I'm an Arch user, there's one big
difference between a minimalist Ubuntu install and an Arch install.

The policy of Ubuntu is, that if you install a package that contains a
service, then it gets enabled. The Arch policy is that the user has to
enable desired services on her own.

There are exceptions on Arch, e.g. if upstream provides
an /etc/xdg/autostart/ file, then e.g. parcellite could auto-start in a
way you might dislike, too.

Anyway, if you e.g have the need to install smartmontools, because you
need smartctl, e.g. to find out if something wakes up your green hard
disk drive, then Ubuntu does enable smartd, while Arch never ever
would do so. So if nothing ever has woken up your green hard disk
drive, then smartd will do.

Résumé, you need to know the policy of the distro you are using to
avoid trouble. Ubuntu by default e.g. installs recommended
dependencies, but doesn't install suggested dependencies, other
distros just care about hard dependencies and mentions the optional
dependencies, but they don't automatically install them, e.g. Arch.

Ubuntu is a user-friendly distro and Arch is _not_ user-friendly, it#s
user-centric.

Another thing to consider is, that some distros, e.g. Arch are
rolling releases. It's not comparable with a pseudo rolling-release,
such as e.g. Debian Sid, aka testing. Arch is stable and consequently
following upstream, but it requires users to care about what's going on
and to edit something, if transitions happen. So, if somebody needs a
LTS, then Ubuntu does provide it. A distro such as Arch is not
unstable, but the features of the software could change much.

Regards,
Ralf



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Tom H-4
In reply to this post by Oliver Grawert
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 5:20 AM, Oliver Grawert <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 29.07.2016, 03:20 -0400 schrieb Tom H:
>
> just because it is such a funny coincident i thought i should point
> out
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2016-July/039464.html
>
> which tries to attack exactly the problems discussed in this thread...
>
> ;)

Very interesting. Thanks.

Martin shows his systemd-networkd heritage with "match:" in "example.config" :)

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Tom H-4
In reply to this post by Ralf Mardorf-2
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Ralf Mardorf <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Ubuntu is a user-friendly distro and Arch is _not_ user-friendly, it#s
> user-centric.

Arch likes to promote itself as non-user-friendly. If that's what
floats its boat, why not; but there's nothing magical or particularly
difficult about installing and maintaining an Arch system.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Josef Wolf
In reply to this post by Oliver Grawert
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 03:15:52PM +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
> well, i assume you can always force a re-generation by the tool, but by
> default you would use the networking tool config that your installation
> prefers ...

From the description, I'd expect an abstraction layer which would regenerate
the config for the underlying system on every reboot. From that, I'd hope to
do my configuration to netplan (which, luckily, don't use INI) and netplan
would cope with the details of the underlying system.

> heh, sorry ... reflexes of an old ubuntu developer ... if someone says
> NIH i go into defensive mode and expect you refer to ubuntu development
> ... :)

I see. As a developer, I know EXACTLY what you mean :-)

> well, there seemingly are problems if you run linux on a virtual switch
> with dynamically generated interfaces or special servers which use bios
> names for devices or some such, i guess linux has grown into areas
> where it had not been used before, it might not affect your desktop or
> home server install but there might actually be usecases for it ...

I am pretty sure such problems exist. Although I've not yet seen them. Not in
the world of embedded systems, and not in networking.

The only situation I came close to the problem was with load-balancing with
multiple pppoe/ether lines.
But that was not a big deal. Just auto-generate some shell-scripts and throw
them into /etc/ppp/if-up.d and use this information to adjust traffic shaping,
policy routing and whatever. Have I ever mentioned my configuration system?

It was not easy, but it was solvable. But I have no idea how this is meant to
be done with the new system. After all, the ppp interfaces don't have
associated hardware.

Anyhow, whoever is going to face such problems would probably have
above-the-average expertise and be able to cope with the situation.

Just to sum up:
- I don't see the problem they want to solve
- I don't see the solution they offer.
- But I DO see the burden they throw onto the average user who is sitting in
  front of their box with a single interface and try to figure the interface
  name just to use ifup/ifconfig/tcpdump or whatever. I'd bet this are about
  99% of all installed systems.

Doesn't sound like a good deal to me.

> this is like bringing support for 1024 partitions to the kernel, 90% of
> linux users will never need such a feature, but it needs to be there
> for ... well.

That's entirely diferent. My first disk is still sda (I admit, it was hda
before) and the first partition on it is still sda1. I have not even noticed
that support for 1024 partitions was added. It did not break anything for the
average user.

--
Josef Wolf
[hidden email]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: interface renaming (was: Re: Moving towards NetworkManager)

Josef Wolf
In reply to this post by Paul Smith-2
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 11:05:36AM -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 14:08 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > If you have several devices, or you connect and disconnect USB
> > network devices, it's likely more tricky.
>
> The real problem is trying to use things like puppet etc. to configure
> lots of systems, if they all use arbitrary different names for eth0.
>
> Especially if they all were configured to use eth0 before.

Exactly!

--
Josef Wolf
[hidden email]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: interface renaming (was: Re: Moving towards NetworkManager)

Colin Law
In reply to this post by Paul Smith-2
On 29 July 2016 at 16:05, Paul Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 14:08 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> If you have several devices, or you connect and disconnect USB
>> network devices, it's likely more tricky.
>
> The real problem is trying to use things like puppet etc. to configure
> lots of systems, if they all use arbitrary different names for eth0.
>
> Especially if they all were configured to use eth0 before.

Was the problem with that way that if you have multiple eth interfaces
it was not guaranteed which would be eth0 and which eth1 etc?

Colin

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: interface renaming (was: Re: Moving towards NetworkManager)

Paul Smith-2
On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 20:43 +0100, Colin Law wrote:

> On 29 July 2016 at 16:05, Paul Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 14:08 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >> If you have several devices, or you connect and disconnect USB
> >> network devices, it's likely more tricky.
> >
> > The real problem is trying to use things like puppet etc. to configure
> > lots of systems, if they all use arbitrary different names for eth0.
> >
> > Especially if they all were configured to use eth0 before.
>
> Was the problem with that way that if you have multiple eth
> interfaces it was not guaranteed which would be eth0 and which eth1
> etc?

For whatever reason, they all seemed to come up with eth0 and I never
had any issues with the way it worked before.  These are all rackmount
systems but they are not all identical hardware; they're a mishmash of
older and newer blades from different vendors, with different features
etc.  However, they have only one actual network connection each (that
is, only one network port actually has a cable attached).

As I upgrade them to Ubuntu 16.04 I have to go in an mess with the
linux kernel command line to disable this new feature, otherwise none
of my puppet configuration works.

So for me everything was just fine before and now it's a nightmare.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Ralf Mardorf-2
In reply to this post by Tom H-4
On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:21:37 -0400, Tom H wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>>
>> Ubuntu is a user-friendly distro and Arch is _not_ user-friendly,
>> it#s user-centric.  
>
>Arch likes to promote itself as non-user-friendly. If that's what
>floats its boat, why not; but there's nothing magical or particularly
>difficult about installing and maintaining an Arch system.

I agree. Maintaining an Arch install is also very simple, but requires
some attention, that by a so called user-friendly distro isn't needed.

For example, the filesystem hierarchy standard changed perhaps 2 or 3
years ago. For most users this was a trouble-free transition, but by
the nature of this kind of change, it wasn't trouble-free for
everybody.

A released based model distro could make such a transition much
user-friendlier.

It doesn't harm to regularly read the Arch news, before upgrading,
while it's less important for an Ubuntu install, to read Ubuntu news.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Josef Wolf
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 03:33:48PM +0200, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 29 July 2016 at 15:08, Josef Wolf <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I don't want any GUI to enter my wifi keys. They are stored in a svn
> > repository which is checked out by configuration scripts which in turn are run
> > by my postinstall script.
>
> Jeez. Well, as discussed, I think you're mad. ;-)

You're probably right. I think, you need some grade of madness to survive in
this world.

I am trying to survive from a different kind of madness: having to
(re)configure dozens of hosts manually. If I want to do some major
configuration changes, I do them on ONE host and commit them to the svn
repository. All the other hosts will catch up. That saves a LOT of work.

> I still think, though, that given what you're saying, Ubuntu isn't the
> right distro for you!

Well, I'm pretty much happy with most of the applications. I'm not going to
learn how thousands of applications are to be configured.

But there are some aspects wich I want to configure differently. And I don't
want to do that manually.

> You uninstalled it in a careless way, which is strongly at odds with
> your apparent level of tech skills.

I was not aware about sublte differences in apt-gt/aptitude. A long time ago I
asked on this list whether aptitude is a proper tool and received positive
answers.

> If you want to manage your own OS and desktop in detail,

I don't want to manage my desktop in detail. In fact: the only thing I've
changed on my desktop is that the unity-application-bar on the left side
auto-hides. I'd like to auto-hide the top bar also, but that's not THAT
important. For me, the main reason for the desktop is to have a conveniet way
to run many screen-windows and many firefox windows. :-)

But I also don't want to wipe the desktop just by trying to configure the
network.

> >> The  next-most-popular tool and replacement for NM seems to be WICD:
> > Another kid in town. No longer supported.
> Yes it is.
> https://launchpad.net/wicd

But for using wicd, I'd also need to remove network-manager to avoid them
stumping on each other? Won't that again wipe my desktop?

--
Josef Wolf
[hidden email]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: interface renaming (was: Re: Moving towards NetworkManager)

Josef Wolf
In reply to this post by Colin Law
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 08:43:47PM +0100, Colin Law wrote:

> On 29 July 2016 at 16:05, Paul Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 14:08 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >> If you have several devices, or you connect and disconnect USB
> >> network devices, it's likely more tricky.
> >
> > The real problem is trying to use things like puppet etc. to configure
> > lots of systems, if they all use arbitrary different names for eth0.
> >
> > Especially if they all were configured to use eth0 before.
>
> Was the problem with that way that if you have multiple eth interfaces
> it was not guaranteed which would be eth0 and which eth1 etc?

With the old system, once the MAC was seen, the interface name was stable. The
problem occured ONLY on the first boot after install.

When you had only one interface, there newer was any problem: it was always
eth0

With multiple interfaces, if you don't care about which interface is what, you
just swap the cables and you're done.

If you DO care (e.g. one is gigabit while the other is 100mbit) then you
adjust the udev-rules ONCE and you're done.

Not a big deal.

Now. it's a nightmare no matter whether you have ONE interface or multiple
interfaces...

--
Josef Wolf
[hidden email]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Colin Law
In reply to this post by Josef Wolf
On 29 July 2016 at 21:04, Josef Wolf <[hidden email]> wrote:
> ..
> But for using wicd, I'd also need to remove network-manager to avoid them
> stumping on each other? Won't that again wipe my desktop?

I thought the reason you lost the desktop was because you used
aptitude, or is that not correct.  Try using apt-get with -s
(simulate) to see what it would do if you removed NM.

Colin

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: interface renaming (was: Re: Moving towards NetworkManager)

Colin Law
In reply to this post by Josef Wolf
On 29 July 2016 at 21:27, Josef Wolf <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 08:43:47PM +0100, Colin Law wrote:
>> On 29 July 2016 at 16:05, Paul Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 14:08 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> >> If you have several devices, or you connect and disconnect USB
>> >> network devices, it's likely more tricky.
>> >
>> > The real problem is trying to use things like puppet etc. to configure
>> > lots of systems, if they all use arbitrary different names for eth0.
>> >
>> > Especially if they all were configured to use eth0 before.
>>
>> Was the problem with that way that if you have multiple eth interfaces
>> it was not guaranteed which would be eth0 and which eth1 etc?
>
> With the old system, once the MAC was seen, the interface name was stable. The
> problem occured ONLY on the first boot after install.

Are you certain about that.  I thought, for example, that if you added
another interface then the original one might change from eth0 to
eth1.  Maybe I am mis-remembering what I read.

Colin

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: interface renaming (was: Re: Moving towards NetworkManager)

Paul Smith-2
On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 22:00 +0100, Colin Law wrote:
> Are you certain about that.  I thought, for example, that if you added
> another interface then the original one might change from eth0 to
> eth1.  Maybe I am mis-remembering what I read.

No, that's not how it works in my experience.  When you first install
the system it will choose which interface is eth0 (for example).  Once
that is done, the system remembers the MAC address of that interface
card and from then on it will always associate the card with that MAC
with eth0, even if new interfaces appear.

However, it's true that when you first install the system it may not be
determinable which interface becomes eth0 but once one is chosen it
stays, from what I can tell.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Moving towards NetworkManager

Josef Wolf
In reply to this post by Colin Law
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 09:53:09PM +0100, Colin Law wrote:
> On 29 July 2016 at 21:04, Josef Wolf <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > ..
> > But for using wicd, I'd also need to remove network-manager to avoid them
> > stumping on each other? Won't that again wipe my desktop?
>
> I thought the reason you lost the desktop was because you used
> aptitude, or is that not correct.  Try using apt-get with -s
> (simulate) to see what it would do if you removed NM.

Yes, you're right.

What would be the correct options for apt-get if I need to do unattended
installs/removes? It should NEVER ask any questions. If dpkg should stumble on
modified files, it can happily wipe the modifications, they will be redone by
the configuration system.

Would the following options be good for that?

  apt-get --yes --force-yes -q

--
Josef Wolf
[hidden email]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: interface renaming (was: Re: Moving towards NetworkManager)

Josef Wolf
In reply to this post by Colin Law
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 10:00:35PM +0100, Colin Law wrote:
> Are you certain about that.  I thought, for example, that if you added
> another interface then the original one might change from eth0 to
> eth1.  Maybe I am mis-remembering what I read.

Once booted, the interface name was tied to the MAC. If you add another card,
it would get the name eth1. Or eth2 for the third card.

The only problem was when a card was defective. Then you replace it and the
replacement is called eth1, because it has a new MAC and eth0 is reserved for
the old (defective) card. But that'S not a real problem: just fix it up in the
udev-rules.

I still fail to see the problem that this new system is trying to solve.

--
Josef Wolf
[hidden email]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
1234