Hello fellows,
My .02 worth on several subjects.
Network Manager since FC8 has been causing more grief to me than it is worth. It looks like it needs to look at the /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ files for eth0 and if it is there don't screw things up (or at least prompt before destruction).
The startup screen with the travelling bars near the bottom of the screen is a waste of time. There is a reason I want to see what the box is doing, and prefer the FC9 behavior. With FC9 I could hit a key and watch for problems. I didn't find any documentation on how to change that to the FC9 behavior.
Firefox refuses to handle a bad certificate. That is all well and good, until your dealing with a firewall that doesn't have one that is valid. I didn't find a way to get beyond the complaint about the certificate. I had to grab my laptop with FC9 to deal with that problem. FC10 made doing anything with the https interface impossible.
Dave
On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 20:50 -0600, David R Wilson wrote:
Hello fellows,
My .02 worth on several subjects.
Network Manager since FC8 has been causing more grief to me than it is worth. It looks like it needs to look at the /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ files for eth0 and if it is there don't screw things up (or at least prompt before destruction).
---- NetworkManager intends to give 'userland' control over network connections whether they are wired, wireless, VPN, etc. Users that are accustomed to switching to superuser to manipulate things aren't likely to appreciate the value of this whereas network administrators know that these things are essential as they don't want users to have super user powers. ----
The startup screen with the travelling bars near the bottom of the screen is a waste of time. There is a reason I want to see what the box is doing, and prefer the FC9 behavior. With FC9 I could hit a key and watch for problems. I didn't find any documentation on how to change that to the FC9 behavior.
---- turn it off...
edit /boot/grub/grub.conf and remove rhgb and quiet from the kernel boot parameters ----
Firefox refuses to handle a bad certificate. That is all well and good, until your dealing with a firewall that doesn't have one that is valid. I didn't find a way to get beyond the complaint about the certificate. I had to grab my laptop with FC9 to deal with that problem. FC10 made doing anything with the https interface impossible.
---- Firefox has made this a feature across the board and so FF 3 whether on Windows, Linux or Macintosh will always throw this safety alert when presented with certificates that are signed by untrusted authorities.
Most people actually read their options and figure this out. This isn't a Fedora issue at all.
Since you are struggling with the whole concept, see this...
http://blog.ivanristic.com/2008/04/firefox-3-ssl-i.html
Craig
Thanks,
I didn't go looking for grub documentation, that is helpful.
Since some of the boxes I administer are servers and dedicated to one task or another I have mostly defeated NetworkManager. I understand the logic for it, I just find it evil more often than not. Modifying startup scripts has been easier for me.
On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 21:27 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 20:50 -0600, David R Wilson wrote:
Hello fellows,
My .02 worth on several subjects.
Network Manager since FC8 has been causing more grief to me than it is worth. It looks like it needs to look at the /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ files for eth0 and if it is there don't screw things up (or at least prompt before destruction).
NetworkManager intends to give 'userland' control over network connections whether they are wired, wireless, VPN, etc. Users that are accustomed to switching to superuser to manipulate things aren't likely to appreciate the value of this whereas network administrators know that these things are essential as they don't want users to have super user powers.
The startup screen with the travelling bars near the bottom of the screen is a waste of time. There is a reason I want to see what the box is doing, and prefer the FC9 behavior. With FC9 I could hit a key and watch for problems. I didn't find any documentation on how to change that to the FC9 behavior.
turn it off...
edit /boot/grub/grub.conf and remove rhgb and quiet from the kernel boot parameters
Firefox refuses to handle a bad certificate. That is all well and good, until your dealing with a firewall that doesn't have one that is valid. I didn't find a way to get beyond the complaint about the certificate. I had to grab my laptop with FC9 to deal with that problem. FC10 made doing anything with the https interface impossible.
Firefox has made this a feature across the board and so FF 3 whether on Windows, Linux or Macintosh will always throw this safety alert when presented with certificates that are signed by untrusted authorities.
Most people actually read their options and figure this out. This isn't a Fedora issue at all.
True. I should have looked for a Firefox list. I figured some of those involved in that project were lurking here.
Since you are struggling with the whole concept, see this...
http://blog.ivanristic.com/2008/04/firefox-3-ssl-i.html
Craig
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 10:19 -0600, David R. Wilson wrote:
Thanks,
I didn't go looking for grub documentation, that is helpful.
Since some of the boxes I administer are servers and dedicated to one task or another I have mostly defeated NetworkManager. I understand the logic for it, I just find it evil more often than not. Modifying startup scripts has been easier for me.
---- here's the thing...
many experienced Linux users are so accustomed to becoming superuser for every thing that efforts to empower userland and lessen the need to become superuser seem to be of little value to them.
Granted - for servers, there is little point to NetworkManager because it's raison d'être is to serve userland and there is no real userland for servers.
My understanding is that if you install from 'Live CD' or if you choose DHCP for network configuration when installing from DVD, NetworkManager is enabled, otherwise, it is not enabled. That seems to be very reasonable logic from my standpoint but I can see that those who just race/clickthrough the install figuring that they'll fix things after first boot will get some surprises.
What I personally object to is knowing how much effort that some of the developers have put into NetworkManager, that just calling it lame/evil from the cheap seats does it a great disservice.
Craig
Craig White wrote:
many experienced Linux users are so accustomed to becoming superuser for every thing that efforts to empower userland and lessen the need to become superuser seem to be of little value to them.
I don't understand this. Surely one didn't normally need to become superuser with the old Network service?
I'm not arguing in favour of the old service, which did not work well for me - NM works much better (now), but personally I wish WiFi came on line before login.
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Craig White wrote:
many experienced Linux users are so accustomed to becoming superuser for every thing that efforts to empower userland and lessen the need to become superuser seem to be of little value to them.
I don't understand this. Surely one didn't normally need to become superuser with the old Network service?
I'm not arguing in favour of the old service, which did not work well for me - NM works much better (now), but personally I wish WiFi came on line before login.
And I'm quite sure you aren't the only one besides me that feels that way.
I'm still waiting on someone to give me a good rational reason why this change was made. If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:07 -0500 Mark Haney wrote:
If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
It isn't merely reinventing the wheel, it is replacing the wheel with some utterly incompatible object that sometimes serves a wheel-like function while not actually working with anything that previously used wheels without extensive mods to all the former users of wheels. And, while, they were at it, they also provide absolutely no documentation about how to use the new wheel-like functionality then claim anyone who can't get it to work is just a whiner.
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:07 -0500 Mark Haney wrote:
If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
It isn't merely reinventing the wheel, it is replacing the wheel with some utterly incompatible object that sometimes serves a wheel-like function while not actually working with anything that previously used wheels without extensive mods to all the former users of wheels. And, while, they were at it, they also provide absolutely no documentation about how to use the new wheel-like functionality then claim anyone who can't get it to work is just a whiner.
No kidding. Let me give just one more example. I installed F10 on another laptop (mine). It's a Compaq Dual core AMD X2 with 8GB RAM. A fresh install. I booted into it after the install (and setting up my network info (wired). Logged in as myself.
No network.
No hint of a network. Loopback was up. Nothing more. With a static IP.
Explain to me how this is 'better'? Explain to the average, first time user how to get this working? Determine how many n00bs are gonna want to fool with Fedora any more when a BASIC FUNCTION like networking, does NOT work out of the box.
It's disgusting. Period. No, this isn't whining, this is simply a case of failed functionality.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:27 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
No kidding. Let me give just one more example. I installed F10 on another laptop (mine). It's a Compaq Dual core AMD X2 with 8GB RAM. A fresh install. I booted into it after the install (and setting up my network info (wired). Logged in as myself.
Lets be very clear. Where did you put in your static network info? Somehow I doubt you put it into NM's per-user connection information store. If you don't understand how NM works and you are putting the information into the legacy systems configuration locations or tools..then should you expect NM to see your settings?
The problem here is that we have a large contingent of users who found the script based approach as acceptable for years and NM represents a substantial change. That script based approach is still there, but its not the default. Because its not the default additional steps must be taken to get the expected behavior they are looking for. That confuses people because it creates a new interaction point between a system they understood well enough to use and a system they don't understand yet.
NM can do simple static after user login, it has its own edit connections concept where static information can be record as part of a connection definition. It doesn't handle complicated options like interface bonding..yet. But it does handle a common set of static ipv4 addressing needs in F10. But to see that static support you have to see NM concepts of configuration editing, not the older sysconfig scripts.
And yes NM doesn't let you establish pre-login connections...yet. But its on the roadmap. http://live.gnome.org/NetworkManagerToDo. Once connection settings can be published for system-wide use when a user is not logged in, that will hopefully satisfy a large chunk of the needs of the sysconfig script users on desktops and laptops. After that its a matter of working on multiple device interactions to incorporate server needs.
Until then you are free to disable NM and use the legacy network service, which uses the legacy sysconfig scripts, which can be editted using the legacy system-config-network ui.
-jef
Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Lets be very clear. Where did you put in your static network info? Somehow I doubt you put it into NM's per-user connection information store. If you don't understand how NM works and you are putting the information into the legacy systems configuration locations or tools..then should you expect NM to see your settings?
Where is "NM's per-user connection information store"? Personally, I've no idea how NM works because I have never seen any documentation that explains how it works. It actually works perfectly for me 95% of the time, but I haven't the slightest idea why. And on the rare occasions when it does not work I haven't the slightest idea what to do, except pray and re-boot (in that order).
And what is the "legacy systems configuration locations"? Assuming you mean /etc/sysconfig/network-scritps/ifcfg-* , are you saying that NM does not look there?
The problem here is that we have a large contingent of users who found the script based approach as acceptable for years and NM represents a substantial change. That script based approach is still there, but its not the default. Because its not the default additional steps must be taken to get the expected behavior they are looking for. That confuses people because it creates a new interaction point between a system they understood well enough to use and a system they don't understand yet.
The reason people are confused by NM is because it is almost completely undocumented. If something does not work it is doubly annoying to be told that "it just works".
And yes NM doesn't let you establish pre-login connections...yet. But its on the roadmap.
Well, someone said earlier in this thread that you could do this by "choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network". I followed similar (but more complicated) instructions some time ago which were said to get NM working before login but they didn't appear to have any effect.
Until then you are free to disable NM and use the legacy network service, which uses the legacy sysconfig scripts, which can be editted using the legacy system-config-network ui.
Has the classic network service improved recently? I thought NM was introduced precisely because the old service did not work properly. I certainly found it infuriating. I'm very grateful for NM, but don't really like to rely on magic.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
The reason people are confused by NM is because it is almost completely undocumented. If something does not work it is doubly annoying to be told that "it just works".
What exactly are you looking for in terms of documentation? Or let me ask it another way.
Is there any application that you can point to that uses GConf that you feel is well documented? NM uses GConf for configuration settings. is there any application that you can point to that uses gnome-keyring that's well documented? NM stores network credentials in gnome-keyring. Is there any service or application that uses D-Bus that you find is sufficiently documented?
I do not think your confusion over NM is strictly a NM problem. I think its a paradigm shift problem around D-Bus as a critical system service. I think D-Bus is a paradigm shift in development that is happening much faster than sysadmins are really equipped to deal with adequately. I think all of the D-Bus related technologies which are superceding more traditional shell scripted approaches are breaking a lot of sysadmins muscle memory. Hal and gnome-mount, PolicyKit and ConsoleKit, and NetworkManager. I think all of these D-Bus utilizing technologies are confusing people, and I don't think the D-Bus centric paradigm has been adequately explained to sysadmins who are going to have to adapt and relearn to make sense of it. I think its something we should all muse over. D-Bus isn't going away and we need to find a way to help sysadmins find the benefit of these technologies over existing approaches.
Have any of the D-Bus technologies started showing up in RHEL-centric certification training yet? That's going to be a watershed moment for sysadmin re-education. Once certs start requiring admins to know how to deal with NM or PolicyKit...etc.. then we'll gain some real traction on the sysadmin oriented documentation.
Has the classic network service improved recently?
I've no idea. Doubtful.
I thought NM was introduced precisely because the old service did not work properly.
Work properly? the legacy tools wasn't designed for mobile roaming usage patterns as a target. You can get it to do what you want, but is it proper? What is proper anyways? Proper is relative to expectation. Expectations for servers and mobile devices are going to be different.
4 years ago I didn't have a computer that connected to 30 different wireless or wired networks over the course of a month. Now I do. And I'm not even an aggressive business traveller. NM aims to be a better solution for these sort of usage patterns as a primary function. Right now for me, and my usage patterns, since I do not run any services on my personal desktops and laptops, NM post-login network activity works perfectly fine for me and my commandline tools.
My Centos 5.2 servers on the other hand are stilling using the older network service because they need network access at boot up..as they are servers. NM has a development roadmap, it includes pre-login system boot up. It takes time to implement that so the legacy network service will continue to be included in Fedora.
We have come to a middle point in the evolution of the networking technology in linux where we have to support two different ways to do things, depending on the situation. We can only choose one of those ways as a default. NM is that default, because it best fits usage cases where the admin is going to be less comfortable doing reconfiguration. For situations where the legacy network service needs to be used still, the expectation is the admin will be able to figure out how to start the legacy network service if its not running by default.
I certainly found it infuriating. I'm very grateful for NM, but don't really like to rely on magic.
You'll have to pardon me, if I'm not particular empathetic to intense emotional feelings over the state of any software development. I reserve feeling intense rage for when sentient beings do something overtly malicious...like key my car when its in a parking lot.
-jef
Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
The reason people are confused by NM is because it is almost completely undocumented. If something does not work it is doubly annoying to be told that "it just works".
What exactly are you looking for in terms of documentation? Or let me ask it another way.
Is there any application that you can point to that uses GConf that you feel is well documented? NM uses GConf for configuration settings. is there any application that you can point to that uses gnome-keyring that's well documented? NM stores network credentials in gnome-keyring.
That would be a nice bit to have documented. I think the issue here is just how "integrated" NM is with the older stuff and just how do you make it behave when it doesn't do what's expected (and that happens quite often). There is no documentation on, for example:
o How to ignore networks you once used but no longer want o Which bits of the /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-xxxx files it pays attention to o How to ensure a network is available even before a user logs in o Where the data is stored and how to modify/purge it
It's a nice bit of stuff, but to just say "it just works" is stretching the truth a bit.
Is there any service or application that uses D-Bus that you find is sufficiently documented?
No, nor is udev-related stuff and that's another major problem. The system with all these black boxes makes debugging things quite difficult at times.
I'm not necessarily complaining, but I did offer my services to document NM to the NM developers and Red Hat several times simply to free up their resources to debug and further develop the thing. My offers, so far, have been studiously ignored. This isn't Oz, gang, and there's absolutely no reason to keep people ignorant of what's behind the curtain. A tiny bit of explanation (even a bloody man page) would do a world of good here.
I've been a hardware and software engineer for over 35 years. I've never subscribed to the "build no mechanism simply if a way can be found to make it complex and wonderful" mentality of many of my peers. Obscurity rarely leads to good things, and just because something's "new" doesn't necessarily make it better (is the /etc/event.d stuff any more efficient or flexible than /etc/inittab? I think not)
To quote Dennis Miller, "That's my opinion. I could be wrong." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer ricks@nerd.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 22643734 Yahoo: origrps2 - - - - Dyslexics of the world: UNTIE! - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Rick Stevens ricks@nerd.com wrote:
I've been a hardware and software engineer for over 35 years. I've never subscribed to the "build no mechanism simply if a way can be found to make it complex and wonderful" mentality of many of my peers. Obscurity rarely leads to good things, and just because something's "new" doesn't necessarily make it better (is the /etc/event.d stuff any more efficient or flexible than /etc/inittab? I think not)
I'm not going to argue with you. Part of the problem is we haven't had an organized server oriented interest group to step up and throw their weight around as a group during our development cycle. There must be a group of people who put server issues on the map and inject themselves into the process. That could be changing however. The a new Server SIG initiative held some discussions on the devel-list pre-holidays.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Server
If you are serious about helping out, this could be the group where you could contribute and make an impact.
-jef
Jeff Spaleta schrieb:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Rick Stevens ricks@nerd.com wrote:
I've been a hardware and software engineer for over 35 years. I've never subscribed to the "build no mechanism simply if a way can be found to make it complex and wonderful" mentality of many of my peers. Obscurity rarely leads to good things, and just because something's "new" doesn't necessarily make it better (is the /etc/event.d stuff any more efficient or flexible than /etc/inittab? I think not)
Agreed. upstart is in the same class of issues as NM, the *Kits and other "novelties" certain people are keen to advertise as "revolutionary feature".
I'm not going to argue with you. Part of the problem is we haven't had an organized server oriented interest group to step up and throw their weight around as a group during our development cycle.
Another part of the problem is Fedora not having a functional "technical management".
Ralf
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Jeff Spaleta jspaleta@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
The reason people are confused by NM is because it is almost completely undocumented. If something does not work it is doubly annoying to be told that "it just works".
What exactly are you looking for in terms of documentation? Or let me ask it another way.
Well, how about something along the lines of what you just posted? Ironically, your post has increased my knowledge of NM by about an order of magnitude beyond the "it just works" nonsense, which rather begs the question of why at least this level of information isn't part of the standard docs.
(I use NM and it just works for me, but if it ever doesn't just work I'll have no idea why).
poc
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
(I use NM and it just works for me, but if it ever doesn't just work I'll have no idea why).
dbus-monitor --system is always fun to watch.
-jef
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 07:48 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
(I use NM and it just works for me, but if it ever doesn't just work I'll have no idea why).
dbus-monitor --system is always fun to watch.
---- there's someone else besides me that needs a life ;-)
Craig
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 8:09 AM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
there's someone else besides me that needs a life ;-)
Even better, I've written a shell script to screen scraper dbus-monitor output and then send me a desktop notification over dbus when there's an event i care about.
D-Bus is somewhat self documenting once you understand the paradigm. You just have to understand it....and as a breed sysadmins only really understand something by scripting it. We don't read API documentation. Right now D-Bus and its kin are aimed at application programers, with a set of API documentation available on the net. Its exactly the sort of documentation sysadmins do not want. its part of the paradigm shift associated with D-Bus.
As sysadmins we need to start figuring out how to help get service introspection implemented for anything d-bus capable so we can start to learn how to fire-off interactions with custom scripted clients by poking the bus and asking it questions about what methods and objects services are providing without having to read API documentation. I continue to think there is something extremely valuable in what the oddjob project attempts to do by making it easier to use D-Bus for sysadmin oriented tasks. Oddjob might not be the right implementation, but I think there is a kernel of goodness there in the approach for sysadmins.
Jeff Spaleta wrote:
dbus-monitor --system is always fun to watch.
I started this in a terminal - how the heck to you stop it once it has started?
I tried the usual things like ctrl-c, esc etc and nothing seems to stop it!
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 09:26 -0800, Mike Cloaked wrote:
Jeff Spaleta wrote:
dbus-monitor --system is always fun to watch.
I started this in a terminal - how the heck to you stop it once it has started?
I tried the usual things like ctrl-c, esc etc and nothing seems to stop it!
---- try Control-Z
Craig
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:07 -0500 Mark Haney wrote:
If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
It isn't merely reinventing the wheel, it is replacing the wheel with some utterly incompatible object that sometimes serves a wheel-like function while not actually working with anything that previously used wheels without extensive mods to all the former users of wheels. And, while, they were at it, they also provide absolutely no documentation about how to use the new wheel-like functionality then claim anyone who can't get it to work is just a whiner.
No kidding. Let me give just one more example. I installed F10 on another laptop (mine). It's a Compaq Dual core AMD X2 with 8GB RAM. A fresh install. I booted into it after the install (and setting up my network info (wired). Logged in as myself.
If you believe that this is something common, you really have no respect for the Fedora developers. I've installed Fedora 9/10 on several different machines now, and I have never needed to do more than plug in an ethernet cable to get wired working.
So please have more respect for the Fedora developers and NetworkManager developers on this public forum. These guys have provided me with too much good software for me to standby have people needlessly disrespect their work.
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:26:53 -0600 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
If you believe that this is something common, you really have no respect for the Fedora developers. I've installed Fedora 9/10 on several different machines now, and I have never needed to do more than plug in an ethernet cable to get wired working.
I've installed it on several different machines now, and never got any functioning networking on any of the installs until I disabled NetworkManager and enabled network.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
I've installed it on several different machines now, and never got any functioning networking on any of the installs until I disabled NetworkManager and enabled network.
Do you mean staticly configured networking?
-jef
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:11:21 -0900 Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Do you mean staticly configured networking?
Either static or DHCP. In all cases I needed the dadgum network to be up without logging in first.
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 15:44:35 -0600 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
Not without running network.
I'll have to check my setup to determine what I did differently. I do know that I have network, at least as soon as I get to KDM (without logging in). This is on F9.
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:11:21 -0900 Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Do you mean staticly configured networking?
Either static or DHCP. In all cases I needed the dadgum network to be up without logging in first.
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
No. It does not. Period. Even setting that option doesn't do it. Even though the interface says it is not 'managed by NM'.
This is why the way Fedora sets up networking is flawed.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:11:21 -0900 Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Do you mean staticly configured networking?
Either static or DHCP. In all cases I needed the dadgum network to be up without logging in first.
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
No. It does not. Period. Even setting that option doesn't do it. Even though the interface says it is not 'managed by NM'.
I assure you it does. I have NetworkManager eabled. I never have to log into KDE to have my network working, and I would know, as I have mythbackend running on my desktop, and mysql-server on another machine, so if the network isn't working without logging in, I would be screwed.
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:11:21 -0900 Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Do you mean staticly configured networking?
Either static or DHCP. In all cases I needed the dadgum network to be up without logging in first.
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
No. It does not. Period. Even setting that option doesn't do it. Even though the interface says it is not 'managed by NM'.
I assure you it does. I have NetworkManager eabled. I never have to log into KDE to have my network working, and I would know, as I have mythbackend running on my desktop, and mysql-server on another machine, so if the network isn't working without logging in, I would be screwed.
Okay, let me rephrase. It does not simply by checking that box. Network has to be running too, and not NM.
Regardless, I find the fact that I HAVE to do that on my static systems (servers, et al.) a completely unnecessary task. I don't see why it's that hard to setup a new option in the setup that allows you to configure that during installation/upgrade.
I can't understand why this isn't an option now.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:11:21 -0900 Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Do you mean staticly configured networking?
Either static or DHCP. In all cases I needed the dadgum network to be up without logging in first.
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
No. It does not. Period. Even setting that option doesn't do it. Even though the interface says it is not 'managed by NM'.
I assure you it does. I have NetworkManager eabled. I never have to log into KDE to have my network working, and I would know, as I have mythbackend running on my desktop, and mysql-server on another machine, so if the network isn't working without logging in, I would be screwed.
Okay, let me rephrase. It does not simply by checking that box. Network has to be running too, and not NM.
All I did when I installed F9 was check that box.
When I log into KDE, the NM applet pops up its notice saying that the ethernet is connected. But it's connected at least by time the login screen comes up.
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
All I did when I installed F9 was check that box.
When I log into KDE, the NM applet pops up its notice saying that the ethernet is connected. But it's connected at least by time the login screen comes up.
Nope. Didn't work for me. Doesn't work that way in F10 either. Again, I hate to beat a dead horse, but NM is great, in theory. But only so. The current implementation is just badly conceived and I hate being forced to deal with it. Linux was all about choice at one time. I don't like getting crap like NM shoved down my throat.
Which is why I run Gentoo now on my personal systems.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
All I did when I installed F9 was check that box.
When I log into KDE, the NM applet pops up its notice saying that the ethernet is connected. But it's connected at least by time the login screen comes up.
Nope. Didn't work for me. Doesn't work that way in F10 either.
Well I am trying to show that there must be some variable here. I didn't put much thought into it, I never thought it was some big deal.
Again, I hate to beat a dead horse, but NM is great, in theory. But only so.
I think that's a bit of an exaggeration.
The current implementation is just badly conceived and I hate being forced to deal with it. Linux was all about choice at one time. I don't like getting crap like NM shoved down my throat.
It to easy to remove to say that you have no choice in the matter. Being able to remove things you don't want has always been part of the choice.
Which is why I run Gentoo now on my personal systems.
Mark Haney wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
All I did when I installed F9 was check that box.
When I log into KDE, the NM applet pops up its notice saying that the ethernet is connected. But it's connected at least by time the login screen comes up.
Nope. Didn't work for me. Doesn't work that way in F10 either. Again, I hate to beat a dead horse, but NM is great, in theory. But only so. The current implementation is just badly conceived and I hate being forced to deal with it. Linux was all about choice at one time. I don't like getting crap like NM shoved down my throat.
Which is why I run Gentoo now on my personal systems.
If you don't like Network Manager, just remove it.
It worked for me on one machine but the other it wouldn't enable the network on boot. I have not tried the static IP with NM on F10 yet. It is working quite well on F7.
I run a static IP on this machine and I need the network at boot time so I just configured the network normally and removed network manager.
Note that system-config-network didn't set the network properly. I had to manually change /etc/sysconfig/networking/devices/ifcfg-eth0 manually.
On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 09:12 -0700, Robin Laing wrote:
If you don't like Network Manager, just remove it.
It worked for me on one machine but the other it wouldn't enable the network on boot. I have not tried the static IP with NM on F10 yet. It is working quite well on F7.
I run a static IP on this machine and I need the network at boot time so I just configured the network normally and removed network manager.
You don't have to remove the service if you don't want to run it. Just disabling it is enough and will not affect your system if using network service.
Note that system-config-network didn't set the network properly. I had to manually change /etc/sysconfig/networking/devices/ifcfg-eth0 manually.
I am wondering if it's NM/The UI (or at least the way it interacts with the config files) that is the problem? As in, if you try using system-config-network-tui it seems to write everything correctly and not screw it up.
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
I don't see this option when I run system-config-network under Fedora-10. I see 'Activate device when computer starts' when I highlight my WiFi device (in system-config-network) and click on Edit. Is that what you mean?
I'm actually reluctant to run system-config-network as when I have done this in the past it stopped NM working.
I see for example it has mode Master under Wireless Settings with no key set. (I don't see that I am asked what encryption I am using.)
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
I don't see this option when I run system-config-network under Fedora-10. I see 'Activate device when computer starts' when I highlight my WiFi device (in system-config-network) and click on Edit. Is that what you mean?
Yes, that's the correct setting. But it doesn't matter when the terminology is, it doesn't change anything unless you shut down NM and start network on boot.
I'd REALLY like to have the choice between NM and network in anaconda during an install or upgrade. But alas, no. Does anyone realize how hard it is to remotely upgrade a server because of that? I used preupgrade on one of my systems, upgraded it, then rebooted to complete the upgrade and wham. No connectivity to finish it. I had to come into the office, hook the crash cart to it and finish the upgrade like it was my desktop system. I'm all for making linux more 'user' friendly, but doing so by crippling those of us who use it as a server is insane.
I'm really tired of this thread. I've said what I wanted to say, not that it changes anything, but it does make me feel better.
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
I'd REALLY like to have the choice between NM and network in anaconda during an install or upgrade. But alas, no. Does anyone realize how hard it is to remotely upgrade a server because of that? I used preupgrade on one of my systems, upgraded it, then rebooted to complete the upgrade and wham. No connectivity to finish it. I had to come into the office, hook the crash cart to it and finish the upgrade like it was my desktop system. I'm all for making linux more 'user' friendly, but doing so by crippling those of us who use it as a server is insane.
I'm really tired of this thread. I've said what I wanted to say, not that it changes anything, but it does make me feel better.
I think the Server SIG is probably a very good opportunity for you to contribute to Fedora and help yourself and others who share your interests in seeing a more server tailored install process.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Server
-jef
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 7:59 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
I don't see this option when I run system-config-network under Fedora-10. I see 'Activate device when computer starts' when I highlight my WiFi device (in system-config-network) and click on Edit. Is that what you mean?
Yes, that's the correct setting. But it doesn't matter when the terminology is, it doesn't change anything unless you shut down NM and start network on boot.
$ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 9 (Sulphur)
# chkconfig --list NetworkManager NetworkManager 0:off 1:off 2:on 3:on 4:on 5:on 6:off
# chkconfig --list network network 0:off 1:off 2:off 3:off 4:off 5:off 6:off
# service NetworkManager status NetworkManager (pid 3088) is running...
# service network status Configured devices: lo eth0 Currently active devices: lo eth0
# cat /etc/sysconfig/networking/devices/ifcfg-eth0 # Marvell Technology Group Ltd. 88E8001 Gigabit Ethernet Controller DEVICE=eth0 BOOTPROTO=dhcp HWADDR=00:11:d8:bd:00:b3 ONBOOT=yes NM_CONTROLLED=yes TYPE=Ethernet USERCTL=no PEERDNS=yes IPV6INIT=no DHCP_HOSTNAME=Watson DNS1=192.168.1.1
Result : Ethernet network starts on boot, no user login necessary.
[ snip ]
I'm really tired of this thread. I've said what I wanted to say, not that it changes anything, but it does make me feel better.
Obviously there is a problem. Rather that simply proclaim it doesn't work, we should try to determine where the fault is as it does and can actually work.
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
And choosing 'enable on boot' in system-config-network doesn't do that?
I don't see this option when I run system-config-network under Fedora-10. I see 'Activate device when computer starts' when I highlight my WiFi device (in system-config-network) and click on Edit. Is that what you mean?
It is.
I'm actually reluctant to run system-config-network as when I have done this in the past it stopped NM working.
It shouldn't. Hasn't happened to me. One time did notice that I lost all my routes, but I wasn't enable to link that to either tool -- so I can't claim it was the fault of either.
I see for example it has mode Master under Wireless Settings with no key set. (I don't see that I am asked what encryption I am using.)
I don't think s-c-network is designed much for the details of wireless, just its bare network interface.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:26:53 -0600 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
If you believe that this is something common, you really have no respect for the Fedora developers. I've installed Fedora 9/10 on several different machines now, and I have never needed to do more than plug in an ethernet cable to get wired working.
I've installed it on several different machines now, and never got any functioning networking on any of the installs until I disabled NetworkManager and enabled network.
Have you taken any measures to have it fixed? File bugs? Post to the NM mailing list? Because this isn't normal.
I have given totally Linux newbies the live media and they get going with full on wifi with no assistance.
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:07 -0500 Mark Haney wrote:
If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
It isn't merely reinventing the wheel, it is replacing the wheel with some utterly incompatible object that sometimes serves a wheel-like function while not actually working with anything that previously used wheels without extensive mods to all the former users of wheels. And, while, they were at it, they also provide absolutely no documentation about how to use the new wheel-like functionality then claim anyone who can't get it to work is just a whiner.
No kidding. Let me give just one more example. I installed F10 on another laptop (mine). It's a Compaq Dual core AMD X2 with 8GB RAM. A fresh install. I booted into it after the install (and setting up my network info (wired). Logged in as myself.
If you believe that this is something common, you really have no respect for the Fedora developers. I've installed Fedora 9/10 on several different machines now, and I have never needed to do more than plug in an ethernet cable to get wired working.
I do have respect for the developers. And yes it seems to be something common when I have 5 systems have the problem. All different hardware, laptops, desktops, servers. And I have never had trouble with wired networking either until F10. I've been a linux geek for 13 or 14 years now (Slackware 3 anyone?) and I've never seen anything like this before. I do not think this is a problem caused by the Fedora guys. I've been nothing but the biggest fan of RH/Fedora my entire career. It started out that way because they were local (I live in NC.) but I realized they do damn good work. This is just a silly implementation change that didn't need to be made. IMO. Initiating an interface on log in? Why? I still have yet to see any reasonable explanation. Not that I expect to get one.
So please have more respect for the Fedora developers and NetworkManager developers on this public forum. These guys have provided me with too much good software for me to standby have people needlessly disrespect their work.
I have plenty of respect for ALL developers. As I said above the Fedora group do damn good work. And, I believe the /intent/ to make a good all around networking implementation is there in the NM devs. I just think it's a silly way to do it. That's not disrespect, that's just a disagreement. Please, take your moral high ground elsewhere. I am not a sheep just waiting for the devs to spoon feed me with whatever they want. If I don't like something, I'm vocal about it. I do file bug reports, as many as I can feasibly handle. The rest I deal with until it's fixed or I find a different way of doing it. That's the beauty of open source.
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 14:28 -0500, Mark Haney wrote:
I have plenty of respect for ALL developers. As I said above the Fedora group do damn good work. And, I believe the /intent/ to make a good all around networking implementation is there in the NM devs. I just think it's a silly way to do it. That's not disrespect, that's just a disagreement. Please, take your moral high ground elsewhere. I am not a sheep just waiting for the devs to spoon feed me with whatever they want. If I don't like something, I'm vocal about it. I do file bug reports, as many as I can feasibly handle. The rest I deal with until it's fixed or I find a different way of doing it. That's the beauty of open source.
---- the assumptions when you use the Live-CD to install...
that you are using dhcp, that you are installing a workstation, not a server and thus it installs and configures NetworkManager.
If you would just download the full DVD and install from that, you would save yourself a headache because it would match your expectations.
Given the amount of installations that you seem to do, it almost makes sense for you to just mirror the entire 'Everything' and 'updates' and install via NFS or HTTP from your own mirror. I personally use 'yam' which is Dag Wieer's brilliant tool for creating mirrors of various repo's with fsync.
Craig
On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:47:23 -0700 Craig White wrote:
If you would just download the full DVD and install from that, you would save yourself a headache because it would match your expectations.
Nope. The DVD installs NetworkManager by default as well. If anaconda would merely ask: "Hey do you want the network on all the time, or only when you flit about between hotspots?" and then install the appropriate bit, none of this controversy would have happened. Making NeworkManager a *replacement* for network, when it does not replace any aspect of network was the big mistake.
Craig White wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 14:28 -0500, Mark Haney wrote:
I have plenty of respect for ALL developers. As I said above the Fedora group do damn good work. And, I believe the /intent/ to make a good all around networking implementation is there in the NM devs. I just think it's a silly way to do it. That's not disrespect, that's just a disagreement. Please, take your moral high ground elsewhere. I am not a sheep just waiting for the devs to spoon feed me with whatever they want. If I don't like something, I'm vocal about it. I do file bug reports, as many as I can feasibly handle. The rest I deal with until it's fixed or I find a different way of doing it. That's the beauty of open source.
the assumptions when you use the Live-CD to install...
that you are using dhcp, that you are installing a workstation, not a server and thus it installs and configures NetworkManager.
I DO use the Full DVD. Since I have multiple systems that I install /upgrade. Not the Live-CD.
If you would just download the full DVD and install from that, you would save yourself a headache because it would match your expectations.
Given the amount of installations that you seem to do, it almost makes sense for you to just mirror the entire 'Everything' and 'updates' and install via NFS or HTTP from your own mirror. I personally use 'yam' which is Dag Wieer's brilliant tool for creating mirrors of various repo's with fsync.
Craig
And yes I do that as well. That's not the point, here I think.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
This is just a silly implementation change that didn't need to be made. IMO. Initiating an interface on log in? Why? I still have yet to see any reasonable explanation. Not that I expect to get one.
Pre-login networking is on the roadmap for NM development. There is desire to make pre-login possible, but its not the primary usage case that drives NM development. The intent was to focus first on mobile use cases, cases where multiple network credentials may need to be stored into a cryptographically secured cache for easily lookup and which can be unlocked by a human. I use 4 different vpn networks (depending on which national government's space based weaponry I'm working on that day), across a number of public and private wired and wireless dynamic networks. NM's design saves me hassle dealing with my own custom scripts. Do I really want to write a script that specifically helps me get on the curling club network and vpn into North Korea's weapon program datacenter handling the passphrases and crap..no thanks. With I login, unlock my session keyring. the curling clubs network brought up automatically and I just click on NM to start up the North Korean VPN or the Icelandic VPN...depending on which weapon I'm working on that day. Far less hassle than dealing with scripts for me. Pre-login network and multiple connections are on the roadmap moving forward.
-jef
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:07 -0500 Mark Haney wrote:
If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
It isn't merely reinventing the wheel, it is replacing the wheel with some utterly incompatible object that sometimes serves a wheel-like function while not actually working with anything that previously used wheels without extensive mods to all the former users of wheels. And, while, they were at it, they also provide absolutely no documentation about how to use the new wheel-like functionality then claim anyone who can't get it to work is just a whiner.
No kidding. Let me give just one more example. I installed F10 on another laptop (mine). It's a Compaq Dual core AMD X2 with 8GB RAM. A fresh install. I booted into it after the install (and setting up my network info (wired). Logged in as myself.
If you believe that this is something common, you really have no respect for the Fedora developers. I've installed Fedora 9/10 on several different machines now, and I have never needed to do more than plug in an ethernet cable to get wired working.
So please have more respect for the Fedora developers and NetworkManager developers on this public forum. These guys have provided me with too much good software for me to standby have people needlessly disrespect their work.
I think the issue comes when you are not using DHCP as many do. If over the years, you have used setup scripts the NM default approach is a problem.
On this fresh install I had to setup my network info in NM at first. Then I moved to network services and turned off NM. A two step approach to get back to the Old way.
As for network info, I found I had to edit the /etc/sysconfig/networking manually because system-config-network kept corrupting the settings. I need to do some testing and file a bug report.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Robin Laing Robin.Laing@drdc-rddc.gc.ca wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:07 -0500 Mark Haney wrote:
If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
It isn't merely reinventing the wheel, it is replacing the wheel with some utterly incompatible object that sometimes serves a wheel-like function while not actually working with anything that previously used wheels without extensive mods to all the former users of wheels. And, while, they were at it, they also provide absolutely no documentation about how to use the new wheel-like functionality then claim anyone who can't get it to work is just a whiner.
No kidding. Let me give just one more example. I installed F10 on another laptop (mine). It's a Compaq Dual core AMD X2 with 8GB RAM. A fresh install. I booted into it after the install (and setting up my network info (wired). Logged in as myself.
If you believe that this is something common, you really have no respect for the Fedora developers. I've installed Fedora 9/10 on several different machines now, and I have never needed to do more than plug in an ethernet cable to get wired working.
So please have more respect for the Fedora developers and NetworkManager developers on this public forum. These guys have provided me with too much good software for me to standby have people needlessly disrespect their work.
I think the issue comes when you are not using DHCP as many do. If over the years, you have used setup scripts the NM default approach is a problem.
On this fresh install I had to setup my network info in NM at first. Then I moved to network services and turned off NM. A two step approach to get back to the Old way.
As for network info, I found I had to edit the /etc/sysconfig/networking manually because system-config-network kept corrupting the settings. I need to do some testing and file a bug report.
On my desktop, I have DHCP available, but i use a static IP.
All I did was use sytem-config-network, and check 'start on boot' and uncheck 'controlled by NM'. Does this not work for you guys?
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Robin Laing Robin.Laing@drdc-rddc.gc.ca wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:07 -0500 Mark Haney wrote:
If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up
SNIP
I think the issue comes when you are not using DHCP as many do. If over the years, you have used setup scripts the NM default approach is a problem.
On this fresh install I had to setup my network info in NM at first. Then I moved to network services and turned off NM. A two step approach to get back to the Old way.
As for network info, I found I had to edit the /etc/sysconfig/networking manually because system-config-network kept corrupting the settings. I need to do some testing and file a bug report.
On my desktop, I have DHCP available, but i use a static IP.
All I did was use sytem-config-network, and check 'start on boot' and uncheck 'controlled by NM'. Does this not work for you guys?
I don't have access to DHCP over the wire (YET) but system-config-network didn't work for me. It wouldn't save the proper netmask and kept creating it's own. Both here at work and at home.
As I said, I have to file a bug report. Still trying to get caught up on email and work from two weeks off for Xmas.
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Robin Laing Robin.Laing@drdc-rddc.gc.ca wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Robin Laing Robin.Laing@drdc-rddc.gc.ca wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Mark Haney mhaney@ercbroadband.org wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:07 -0500 Mark Haney wrote:
> If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up
SNIP
I think the issue comes when you are not using DHCP as many do. If over the years, you have used setup scripts the NM default approach is a problem.
On this fresh install I had to setup my network info in NM at first. Then I moved to network services and turned off NM. A two step approach to get back to the Old way.
As for network info, I found I had to edit the /etc/sysconfig/networking manually because system-config-network kept corrupting the settings. I need to do some testing and file a bug report.
On my desktop, I have DHCP available, but i use a static IP.
All I did was use sytem-config-network, and check 'start on boot' and uncheck 'controlled by NM'. Does this not work for you guys?
I don't have access to DHCP over the wire (YET) but system-config-network didn't work for me. It wouldn't save the proper netmask and kept creating it's own. Both here at work and at home.
Yah I heard about that bug, I believe it was fixed.
As I said, I have to file a bug report. Still trying to get caught up on email and work from two weeks off for Xmas.
Good luck.
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:07 -0500 Mark Haney wrote:
If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
It isn't merely reinventing the wheel, it is replacing the wheel with some utterly incompatible object that sometimes serves a wheel-like function while not actually working with anything that previously used wheels without extensive mods to all the former users of wheels. And, while, they were at it, they also provide absolutely no documentation about how to use the new wheel-like functionality then claim anyone who can't get it to work is just a whiner.
I liked this analogy but I feel that Network Manager is just a different type of wheel than a re-invention. It is like comparing a tire for a motorbike to that of a truck. They both roll on the road but do it in different ways.
I have installed F10 on two machines so far. In one case, NM is being used as the machine won't be on a network for 99.9% of the time. The other machine is on a full time network and requires full network access before the login procedure. On this machine, I turned off Network Manager and use the normal network services. It took about 30 seconds.
On a F7 laptop, Network Manager works great. Can go from wired fixed IP address to wireless DHCP address by unplugging the ethernet cable. It is just that easy.
The only problem that I have run into regarding networking is ethernet devices not being activated.
So far I find F10 to be be better than F8 on the same machine other than sound but that is another subject. :)
-- Robin Laing
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 16:40 -0500, Mark Haney wrote:
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Craig White wrote:
many experienced Linux users are so accustomed to becoming superuser for every thing that efforts to empower userland and lessen the need to become superuser seem to be of little value to them.
I don't understand this. Surely one didn't normally need to become superuser with the old Network service?
---- wanna bet?
You can't do didly squat as user with '/etc/init.d/network', ifup, ifdown, /sbin/route unless you can either su or sudo. ----
I'm not arguing in favour of the old service, which did not work well for me - NM works much better (now), but personally I wish WiFi came on line before login.
---- but if WiFi came on line before login, WiFi would have to run as root because 'user' has yet to login. That's surely possible but you have to manually configure things and not use NM ----
And I'm quite sure you aren't the only one besides me that feels that way.
I'm still waiting on someone to give me a good rational reason why this change was made. If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
---- and that's been discussed on this list many, many, many times since I think it was Jim Wilkinson started playing with this concept of NetworkManager and userland.
There is no 're-invention' of any wheel. Only the desire to move more things away from requiring root level control into the user space so users can go from wireless lan to wired lan to wireless lan and remain users. It allows corporate systems to go out the door where the actual users don't have to know root password or become superuser to actually use the computer.
This pretty much tracks with the way things have been headed with Windows and Macintosh systems too...where the wireless (and wired for that matter) connections are made by users that might not have access to superuser passwords/privileges and don't come up until after you log in as the user.
It really is no different than what has happened with 'removable' storage items like USB disks.
Craig
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 16:40 -0500, Mark Haney wrote:
I'm still waiting on someone to give me a good rational reason why this change was made. If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
and that's been discussed on this list many, many, many times since I think it was Jim Wilkinson started playing with this concept of NetworkManager and userland.
People who make comments like this have probably never tried to roam around with a wifi connection.
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 17:36 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 16:40 -0500, Mark Haney wrote:
I'm still waiting on someone to give me a good rational reason why this change was made. If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
and that's been discussed on this list many, many, many times since I think it was Jim Wilkinson started playing with this concept of NetworkManager and userland.
People who make comments like this have probably never tried to roam around with a wifi connection.
---- I don't see any bug reports with your e-mail address attached...
Craig
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 17:36 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 16:40 -0500, Mark Haney wrote:
I'm still waiting on someone to give me a good rational reason why this change was made. If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
and that's been discussed on this list many, many, many times since I think it was Jim Wilkinson started playing with this concept of NetworkManager and userland.
People who make comments like this have probably never tried to roam around with a wifi connection.
I don't see any bug reports with your e-mail address attached...
I use pembo13 instead of pemboa for bug reports, pemboa is just for mailing lists, same email provider.
And I was referring to Mark Haney's comments.
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 17:46 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 17:36 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 16:40 -0500, Mark Haney wrote:
I'm still waiting on someone to give me a good rational reason why this change was made. If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
and that's been discussed on this list many, many, many times since I think it was Jim Wilkinson started playing with this concept of NetworkManager and userland.
People who make comments like this have probably never tried to roam around with a wifi connection.
I don't see any bug reports with your e-mail address attached...
I use pembo13 instead of pemboa for bug reports, pemboa is just for mailing lists, same email provider.
---- WPA supplicant sucks on all OS's ;-( ----
And I was referring to Mark Haney's comments.
---- so was I originally...userland control is essential to the growth of Linux.
The people who gripe about NM seem to always be the ones who are more than capable of becoming superuser so NM seems to be a barrier to them.
Craig
Craig White wrote:
userland control is essential to the growth of Linux.
Why? It seems to me to be good for some things, and bad for others.
Most Linux users are just using one machine. It doesn't seem to me to make much difference in that context.
I have the impression that many Linux developers believe everyone is working on machines in a vast network.
On Wednesday 07 January 2009 23:59:13 Craig White wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 17:46 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com
wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 17:36 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com
wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 16:40 -0500, Mark Haney wrote:
I'm still waiting on someone to give me a good rational reason why this change was made. If I get one that makes sense, then I might shut up about this, otherwise, to me NM is just re-inventing the wheel to no purpose.
and that's been discussed on this list many, many, many times since I think it was Jim Wilkinson started playing with this concept of NetworkManager and userland.
People who make comments like this have probably never tried to roam around with a wifi connection.
I don't see any bug reports with your e-mail address attached...
I use pembo13 instead of pemboa for bug reports, pemboa is just for mailing lists, same email provider.
WPA supplicant sucks on all OS's ;-(
How odd, then, that this laptop running Mandriva and my EeePC running Xandros have no problem with it.
And I was referring to Mark Haney's comments.
so was I originally...userland control is essential to the growth of Linux.
The people who gripe about NM seem to always be the ones who are more than capable of becoming superuser so NM seems to be a barrier to them.
No. Many of the people who gripe about NM are ones who have followed every instruction and advice given and still can't get the d****** thing to work. I'm sure it's wonderful when it does, but you can't stick your head in the sand and pretend that there are no problems.
Anne
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler@chello.at wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
People who make comments like this have probably never tried to roam around with a wifi connection.
Uh, works for me. The university wireless just works.
You hop from wireless point to wireless point without NetworkManager?
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
You hop from wireless point to wireless point without NetworkManager?
No (well, I did in the past with my old laptop using a set of custom-written wlan*.sh scripts, but that was a horribly ugly hack I'm glad to do without), indeed NetworkManager is part of the required infrastructure, I actually fully agree with you.
Kevin Kofler
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
This pretty much tracks with the way things have been headed with Windows and Macintosh systems too...where the wireless (and wired for that matter) connections are made by users that might not have access to superuser passwords/privileges and don't come up until after you log in as the user.
This happens a lot with people traveling frequently.
It really is no different than what has happened with 'removable' storage items like USB disks.
Craig
Best example yet. Nothing works better like a good simile to explain NM.
~af
Craig White wrote:
You can't do didly squat as user with '/etc/init.d/network', ifup, ifdown, /sbin/route unless you can either su or sudo.
Special case - if the /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-* file has "USERCTL=yes", then a normal user can bring the interface up or down, with all the network changes that go with it. Before NetworkManager, I used to have several ifcfg-eth? files that all used eth0, but had different configurations for where I was. I still use the network service on my desktop, because I want the network interface up even if no-one is logged in. (I have an openvpn connection set up to it.)
Mikkel
Craig White wrote:
Surely one didn't normally need to become superuser with the old Network service?
wanna bet?
You can't do didly squat as user with '/etc/init.d/network', ifup, ifdown, /sbin/route unless you can either su or sudo.
But you didn't _normally_ have to use any of those commands. Assuming it was working properly (which in my case it wasn't a lot of the time) WiFi just came up when I booted.
I had to be superuser to edit /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-* , certainly, but then I have to be superuser to edit /etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/* . What is the difference?
Timothy Murphy-5 wrote:
NM works much better (now), but personally I wish WiFi came on line before login.
Me too! I have looked at various postings about editing the network manager .conf file to add ,keyfile so that you can make a network connection become "system-wide" - but this has totally defeated me - I have F10 fully updated but have not been able to make this work for my home WPA encrypted connection. Sure the NM connects for any user once they are logged in - but despite giving authorization to the user (i.e. to me) I could not persuade NM to set a system-wide wireless connection.... if anyone knows the magic recipe please do post it on this forum?
Maybe that facility is still not actually working in the latest version of NM?
--- On Wed, 1/7/09, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
My understanding is that if you install from 'Live CD' or if you choose DHCP for network configuration when installing from DVD, NetworkManager is enabled, otherwise, it is not enabled. That seems to be very reasonable logic from my standpoint but I can see that those who just race/clickthrough the install figuring that they'll fix things after first boot will get some surprises.
I know I'm coming in a little late on this thread, but this comment caught my eye.
The installer (I use the DVD) doesn't seem to offer networking setup any more, which I chalked up to the evolution toward NM. I thought it was a little too Winduhs-like to assume that the user would use DHCP. I've installed F10 several times now-- where am I missing network setup?
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Bob Kinney bc98kinney@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Wed, 1/7/09, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
My understanding is that if you install from 'Live CD' or if you choose DHCP for network configuration when installing from DVD, NetworkManager is enabled, otherwise, it is not enabled. That seems to be very reasonable logic from my standpoint but I can see that those who just race/clickthrough the install figuring that they'll fix things after first boot will get some surprises.
I know I'm coming in a little late on this thread, but this comment caught my eye.
The installer (I use the DVD) doesn't seem to offer networking setup any more, which I chalked up to the evolution toward NM. I thought it was a little too Winduhs-like to assume that the user would use DHCP. I've installed F10 several times now-- where am I missing network setup?
I insttalled F10 on a test box this week via LiveCD and there was no network setup. I was able to do what ever setup I needed once I logged in however.
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Bob Kinney bc98kinney@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Wed, 1/7/09, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
My understanding is that if you install from 'Live CD' or if you choose DHCP for network configuration when installing from DVD, NetworkManager is enabled, otherwise, it is not enabled. That seems to be very reasonable logic from my standpoint but I can see that those who just race/clickthrough the install figuring that they'll fix things after first boot will get some surprises.
I know I'm coming in a little late on this thread, but this comment caught my eye.
The installer (I use the DVD) doesn't seem to offer networking setup any more, which I chalked up to the evolution toward NM. I thought it was a little too Winduhs-like to assume that the user would use DHCP. I've installed F10 several times now-- where am I missing network setup?
You're not missing it. The option to set an static ip is just not there. Maybe if one uses 'linux askmethod' and chooses NFS or some other network type install it would ask for net info. I've only install from DVD, but it occurs to me that a NFS install would force you to enter static ip info.
~af
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009 20:19:33 -0800 Aldo Foot wrote:
You're not missing it. The option to set an static ip is just not there. Maybe if one uses 'linux askmethod' and chooses NFS or some other network type install it would ask for net info. I've only install from DVD, but it occurs to me that a NFS install would force you to enter static ip info.
There is a 'asknetwork' boot parameter I turn on when installing from hard disk that gets it to ask me about the network connection, and I have successfully defined a static IP at install time that way (of course, it doesn't work right after the system boots till you disable NetworkManager and enable network :-).
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009 20:19:33 -0800 Aldo Foot wrote:
You're not missing it. The option to set an static ip is just not there. Maybe if one uses 'linux askmethod' and chooses NFS or some other network type install it would ask for net info. I've only install from DVD, but it occurs to me that a NFS install would force you to enter static ip info.
There is a 'asknetwork' boot parameter I turn on when installing from hard disk that gets it to ask me about the network connection, and I have successfully defined a static IP at install time that way (of course, it doesn't work right after the system boots till you disable NetworkManager and enable network :-).
Nice tip. Thanks. So I take it you get to the boot prompt by frantically pressing the ESC key? That NM thing is like the hiccups that woudn't go away... :-)
~af
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009 21:16:34 -0800 Aldo Foot wrote:
Nice tip. Thanks. So I take it you get to the boot prompt by frantically pressing the ESC key?
Nah, when booting to do a hard disk install, I usually just extract the necessary images from the DVD and make a grub entry pointing at them with all the boot time parameters I want to define, then I just reboot and select that grub entry, and anaconda starts up with all the right options already defined. Much more convenient that fooling with physical DVDs.
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009 21:16:34 -0800 Aldo Foot wrote:
Nice tip. Thanks. So I take it you get to the boot prompt by frantically pressing the ESC key?
Nah, when booting to do a hard disk install, I usually just extract the necessary images from the DVD and make a grub entry pointing at them with all the boot time parameters I want to define, then I just reboot and select that grub entry, and anaconda starts up with all the right options already defined. Much more convenient that fooling with physical DVDs.
Very practical approach. Reminds me of the kickstart idea.
~af
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:20 PM, David R Wilson david@wwns.com wrote:
Firefox refuses to handle a bad certificate. That is all well and good, until your dealing with a firewall that doesn't have one that is valid. I didn't find a way to get beyond the complaint about the certificate. I had to grab my laptop with FC9 to deal with that problem. FC10 made doing anything with the https interface impossible.
It does not refuse to handle invalid certificates, it just pesters you to accept them. You can do so permanently or just for the current session, your choice. Look carefully at the popup dialog and click the magic buttons.
poc
I looked for a way to make an exception. I didn't find it. With FC9 I had that as an option. This was immediately after a yum update.
Dave
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 10:50 +0000, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:20 PM, David R Wilson david@wwns.com wrote:
Firefox refuses to handle a bad certificate. That is all well and good, until your dealing with a firewall that doesn't have one that is valid. I didn't find a way to get beyond the complaint about the certificate. I had to grab my laptop with FC9 to deal with that problem. FC10 made doing anything with the https interface impossible.
It does not refuse to handle invalid certificates, it just pesters you to accept them. You can do so permanently or just for the current session, your choice. Look carefully at the popup dialog and click the magic buttons.
poc
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 10:45 -0600, David R. Wilson wrote:
I looked for a way to make an exception. I didn't find it. With FC9 I had that as an option. This was immediately after a yum update.
---- there was a way to make an exception...you just didn't look hard enough.
http://blog.ivanristic.com/2008/04/firefox-3-ssl-i.html
Craig
David R Wilson wrote:
The startup screen with the travelling bars near the bottom of the screen is a waste of time. There is a reason I want to see what the box is doing, and prefer the FC9 behavior. With FC9 I could hit a key and watch for problems. I didn't find any documentation on how to change that to the FC9 behavior.
Just press ESC.
Firefox refuses to handle a bad certificate. That is all well and good, until your dealing with a firewall that doesn't have one that is valid. I didn't find a way to get beyond the complaint about the certificate. I had to grab my laptop with FC9 to deal with that problem. FC10 made doing anything with the https interface impossible.
As others have pointed out, there is a way to do this in Firefox, but you could also use a browser which makes this much less of a PITA. Konqueror allows you to allow the certificate for the current session or even forever in 2 clicks.
Kevin Kofler
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler@chello.at wrote:
David R Wilson wrote:
The startup screen with the travelling bars near the bottom of the screen is a waste of time. There is a reason I want to see what the box is doing, and prefer the FC9 behavior. With FC9 I could hit a key and watch for problems. I didn't find any documentation on how to change that to the FC9 behavior.
Just press ESC.
Firefox refuses to handle a bad certificate. That is all well and good, until your dealing with a firewall that doesn't have one that is valid. I didn't find a way to get beyond the complaint about the certificate. I had to grab my laptop with FC9 to deal with that problem. FC10 made doing anything with the https interface impossible.
As others have pointed out, there is a way to do this in Firefox, but you could also use a browser which makes this much less of a PITA. Konqueror allows you to allow the certificate for the current session or even forever in 2 clicks.
He could also read the page Firefox puts up when such a certificate is encountered.