Re: Network Manager dependencies
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Emmet Hikory wrote: > > Of course, as the tools continue to advance, some other selection may > make sense in the future, but even then I think we should continue to debate > the tools in terms of how the system is expected to be used, rather than > what hardware is present, or into which environment we expect that hardware > to be placed. +1 -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 3:18 AM, Tom H wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre > wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Tom H wrote: >>> >>> Could NM's "Depends" and "Recommends" be pared down for an X-less >>> use-case? Thanks. >> >> "We'll burn that bridge when we get there." :) >> >> Seriously though; I agree that some of these requirements are >> unfortunate, especially with all this coming from glib-networking >> (which I'll look to make sure is really required). Any help you can >> provide to reducing these requirements and making NetworkManager >> suitable on X-less systems is definitely welcome. I recommend you come >> hang around on #nm on Freenode if it's the case; this is where the >> upstream NetworkManager development gets done. > > I've never used IRC and I'm not a developer so I'll probably feel like > an alien on #nm! > > I'd nevertheless like to help if I can find the time. If I can figure > out what the deb equivalent of an rpm spec file is, I'll drop the GUI > dependencies, build a local package, and test it. I forgot to mention that I installed NM in an X-less Debian 7 VM. Both the "Depends" and Recommends" are far fewer, so it *ought* to work on Ubuntu too. (Side note: the Debian "Depends" don't include polkit so running "nm-tool" displays a "permission request failed" warning before giving the network settings; perhaps a case of requirements that are too pared down...) -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Jordon Bedwell wrote: > > I guess this whole NM issue might fall under the tasksel issue, I > prefer not to use it but a friend of mine does...you prefer NM I > prefer to stay away from it, preference perhaps? But with preference > comes the problem that NM relies on wpasupplicant and a couple of > other wireless tools that we would absolutely never need on a server, > unless we are crazy or there is some one-off sysadmin who has some > crazy ideas. I took on a job a few weeks ago where everything's using wifi, even the servers; so there's a case for wpasupplicant on a server. :) -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Tom H wrote: >> NM on Fedora can now handle bonding and bridging by reading >> "/etc/sysconfig/netwok-scripts/ifcfg-*" files. >> >> I was curious about whether NM could do the same by reading >> "/etc/network/interfaces" so I've just tried to install NM in an >> X-less Quantal VM. > > Not by reading /e/n/i; but bonding and bridging support was added in > NetworkManager 0.9.4.0. > > There is currently no way to configure it besides the rather opaque > files in /etc/NetworkManager/system-connections. I used a file in "/etc/NetworkManager/system-connections" last night. Thanks. >> "apt-get install network-manager" results in: >> > [...] >> and >> >> "apt-get install network-manager -o APT::Install-Recommends=false" results >> in: >> > [...] >> So, even an installation of NM without its "Recommends" (which isn't >> something that I like to do or, AFAIK, something that's recommended) >> results in the installation of packages that are only needed by a DE, >> like dconf-gsettings-backend, dconf-service, glib-networking, >> glib-networking-common, glib-networking-services, >> gsettings-desktop-schemas. It should've been "that I don't like to do nor". >> Could NM's "Depends" and "Recommends" be pared down for an X-less >> use-case? Thanks. > > "We'll burn that bridge when we get there." :) > > Seriously though; I agree that some of these requirements are > unfortunate, especially with all this coming from glib-networking > (which I'll look to make sure is really required). Any help you can > provide to reducing these requirements and making NetworkManager > suitable on X-less systems is definitely welcome. I recommend you come > hang around on #nm on Freenode if it's the case; this is where the > upstream NetworkManager development gets done. I've never used IRC and I'm not a developer so I'll probably feel like an alien on #nm! I'd nevertheless like to help if I can find the time. If I can figure out what the deb equivalent of an rpm spec file is, I'll drop the GUI dependencies, build a local package, and test it. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Tom H's message of 2012-08-22 00:24:11 -0700: >> >> IMO, we'll end up sooner or later using NM on X-less boxes by default > > I do not share your opinion. While I'm not ifupdown's biggest fan, it > will likely be the network configuration tool of choice on servers for > the forseeable future. NM is specifically targetted at the more flexible > networking requirements of laptops and mobile systems. It does not, > however, take into account all of the myriad use cases for servers that > ifupdown handles. Given the dislike/hate for that's often expressed on debian-devel, Ubuntu'll have ifupdown and not have to worry about developing a home-grown alternative to NM. As an end-user I find the idea that every distribution has its own networking configuration stack frustrating. In my day job, I work with RHEL and Solaris. But I moonlight and have to deal with Arch, Debian, Gentoo, Scientific (and Fedora), and Ubuntu. Arch and Gentoo are only twice and once respectively - which makes things even worse. Now that NM can handle bonds, bridges, and vlans, my hope's that installing it on a X-less server'll be easy. Quite frankly, from an efficiency perspective for Linux as a whole, it'd make more sense for more developers to improve NM rather than work an alternatives. But open source doesn't work this way. Regarding the "flexible networking requirements", people make the same argument for not switching to upstart or systemd.. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
Dale Amon wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 07:40:58PM -0500, Jordon Bedwell wrote: > > prefer to stay away from it, preference perhaps? But with preference > > comes the problem that NM relies on wpasupplicant and a couple of > > other wireless tools that we would absolutely never need on a server, > > unless we are crazy or there is some one-off sysadmin who has some > > crazy ideas. > > I agree for the most part... although there are appliances that > use mobile phone connection as a sysadmin emergency back door > to get at servers if the host facility backbone is down. Consider also the case of mobile servers, which have started to become available in retail: current devices are things like WiFi<->4G bridge routers, portable WiFi NAS devices, etc. We very much shouldn't limit our conception of what makes sense on a "server" to only that set of things that happens to make sense for large devices in racks in a data centre. That said, ifupdown can currently handle just about any type of network connection the administrator can imagine, including complexities like autofailover to VPN over PAN, or arbitrary ESSID WiFi activated by USB key or local presence of a bluetooth device. Where Network Manager shines is in the close userspace coordination of the selection and activation of network connections, considerably reducing the advance configuration necessary to adjust to a wide variety of network options, and allowing users to immediately begin to use hotplug network devices. So, rather than debating whether a "server" should be using Network Manager or ifupdown based on the networking technologies that one might imagine to be used for some arbitrary hardware in some arbitrary environment, we should instead consider how we expect the users of the system to interact with the system we use to define and configure the networks. Devices with a single user running interactive processes will likely be better served by Network Manager (or similar tools), as the user will want to be able to select from available networking options at will and receive notifications about the current state of the network. Devices with few interactive processes will likely be better served by ifupdown, as the administrator will want to configure the networking options once, and allow users to attach to network services exposed once the network comes up. Of course, as the tools continue to advance, some other selection may make sense in the future, but even then I think we should continue to debate the tools in terms of how the system is expected to be used, rather than what hardware is present, or into which environment we expect that hardware to be placed. -- Emmet HIKORY -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 07:40:58PM -0500, Jordon Bedwell wrote: > prefer to stay away from it, preference perhaps? But with preference > comes the problem that NM relies on wpasupplicant and a couple of > other wireless tools that we would absolutely never need on a server, > unless we are crazy or there is some one-off sysadmin who has some > crazy ideas. I agree for the most part... although there are appliances that use mobile phone connection as a sysadmin emergency back door to get at servers if the host facility backbone is down. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Dale Amon wrote: > I usually de-install it on servers. A server has the interfaces > and static IP addresses I tell it has and it should never, ever > even consider overriding those settings. > > NM is okay (usually) for portable luser devices, but not for > the rack. I think I would be a little bit upset if Ubuntu started defaulting to NM on servers. It brings nothing better or new to the table and as everybody already mentioned it's focus is primarily mobile users. I have it on my laptop, wouldn't live without it, but on my desktop I remove it and use ifupdown because removing NM allows me to remove dependencies I'll never need or use and ones that I wouldn't file a ticket over because so many other users need it. I guess this whole NM issue might fall under the tasksel issue, I prefer not to use it but a friend of mine does...you prefer NM I prefer to stay away from it, preference perhaps? But with preference comes the problem that NM relies on wpasupplicant and a couple of other wireless tools that we would absolutely never need on a server, unless we are crazy or there is some one-off sysadmin who has some crazy ideas. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 04:56:40PM -0400, Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Tom H wrote: > > IMO, we'll end up sooner or later using NM on X-less boxes by default > > It might be the case eventually, but we're not there yet. I usually de-install it on servers. A server has the interfaces and static IP addresses I tell it has and it should never, ever even consider overriding those settings. NM is okay (usually) for portable luser devices, but not for the rack. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Tom H wrote: > IMO, we'll end up sooner or later using NM on X-less boxes by default It might be the case eventually, but we're not there yet. > NM on Fedora can now handle bonding and bridging by reading > "/etc/sysconfig/netwok-scripts/ifcfg-*" files. > > I was curious about whether NM could do the same by reading > "/etc/network/interfaces" so I've just tried to install NM in an > X-less Quantal VM. Not by reading /e/n/i; but bonding and bridging support was added in NetworkManager 0.9.4.0. There is currently no way to configure it besides the rather opaque files in /etc/NetworkManager/system-connections. This will be fixed eventually, but you'll still see the configuration methods come up in nm-applet first, before it's added to the command-line configuration tool or to the /e/n/i parser (and parsing that is difficult, if not dangerous anyway). > > "apt-get install network-manager" results in: > [...] > and > > "apt-get install network-manager -o APT::Install-Recommends=false" results in: > [...] > So, even an installation of NM without its "Recommends" (which isn't > something that I like to do or, AFAIK, something that's recommended) > results in the installation of packages that are only needed by a DE, > like dconf-gsettings-backend, dconf-service, glib-networking, > glib-networking-common, glib-networking-services, > gsettings-desktop-schemas. > [...] > Could NM's "Depends" and "Recommends" be pared down for an X-less > use-case? Thanks. "We'll burn that bridge when we get there." :) Seriously though; I agree that some of these requirements are unfortunate, especially with all this coming from glib-networking (which I'll look to make sure is really required). Any help you can provide to reducing these requirements and making NetworkManager suitable on X-less systems is definitely welcome. I recommend you come hang around on #nm on Freenode if it's the case; this is where the upstream NetworkManager development gets done. Regards, Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre Freenode: cyphermox, Jabber: mathieu...@gmail.com 4096R/EE018C93 1967 8F7D 03A1 8F38 732E FF82 C126 33E1 EE01 8C93 -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Network Manager dependencies
Excerpts from Tom H's message of 2012-08-22 00:24:11 -0700: > IMO, we'll end up sooner or later using NM on X-less boxes by default > I do not share your opinion. While I'm not ifupdown's biggest fan, it will likely be the network configuration tool of choice on servers for the forseeable future. NM is specifically targetted at the more flexible networking requirements of laptops and mobile systems. It does not, however, take into account all of the myriad use cases for servers that ifupdown handles. > NM on Fedora can now handle bonding and bridging by reading > "/etc/sysconfig/netwok-scripts/ifcfg-*" files. > ... > The following NEW packages will be installed: > consolekit dconf-gsettings-backend dconf-service dnsmasq-base > glib-networking glib-networking-common glib-networking-services > gsettings-desktop-schemas iputils-arping libck-connector0 libdconf1 > libgudev-1.0-0 libnetfilter-conntrack3 libnl-route-3-200 libnm-glib4 > libnm-util2 libnspr4 libnss3 libpcsclite1 libpolkit-agent-1-0 > libpolkit-backend-1-0 libproxy1 libsoup2.4-1 libsysfs2 libxml2 > network-manager policykit-1 wpasupplicant Thats cool. If we go down that route in Ubuntu, perhaps then we would address the dependencies that you mentioned. But AFAIK, there is no such plan and ifupdown is safe for the time being. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
