Re: NetworkManager-wait-online is still utterly, and completely, broken

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Tom Horsley writes:

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 10:50:44 -0500
Sam Varshavchik wrote:

> Maybe, perhaps, this approach should've made sense to do so only when NM
> actually was able to support all the functionality it was taking over? How's
> that for a crazy idea? Does anyone think I'm being completely off-base and
> unreasonable, expecting to things to continue to work, as is, by default?

Welcome to the world of fedora! Fedora is supposed to be
cutting edge, but it is too bad that often turns out
to be broken edge instead :-).
To me "cutting edge" means "new stuff that may or may not work". It doesn't  
mean "stuff that randomly breaks existing stuff that works". I think there's  
a lot of ground in between. It's not a nuanced distinction.
Let's draw an analogy with something else. Accelerated graphics. Folks who  
were around that era remember quite well how the things progressed, with the  
X RENDER extension, and such.
It was an entirely new X infrastructure. There were plenty of growing pains.  
Certain hardware worked. Then it broke, then it worked again. This went on  
for a while.
But throughout the evolution of accelerated graphics infrastructure, the  
traditional unaccelerated X worked flawlessly. You knew you could always, at  
least, turn off acceleration and have a working, functional desktop. You  
would no longer get to play with all the new toys, accelerated graphics and  
video, but you, at least, always go back to the way things were before. It  
never broke. And it still works just fine. Existing stuff just
did
not
break.

It did seem to take about 10 years or so for all the features
of the old network service to at least supposedly be supported
in nm, I'd get a new fedora and say "Ah! Maybe nm works in this
release", try it for a while, then go back to network (it is
a blessing that they didn't eradicate network as happens all to
often with new shiny features).
And see, that's the other thing. How about just making "all the features of  
the old network service" continue to putter along, in some fashion, while NM  
works on building its own new shiny ball? If NM is going to be the default,  
either make it a default for new installs and not upgrades; or make it fully  
support the existing functionality. That's all.
I originally had a lot of other things that I wrote down, but I just deleted  
it. It's just screaming into the air. Instead, I'll just sign off by  
presenting a small puzzle to solve.
Let's take two packages in Fedora: ncurses and pcre. Tons of stuff depends  
on them. dnf won't let me remove pcre, because dnf itself depends on it. And  
I was shocked to see that dnf won't let me remove ncurses either because  
sudo depends on it. Who knew. Despite the dominance of GUI desktops, you  
still have fundamental dependencies on plain old curses. I have no idea how  
much stuff really depends on these two. Must be a lot. Using rpm just to  
test the first level of dependencies, I count 37 for pcre. Just 3 for  
curses, but that's just first order dependencies.
I never, ever, read the same kind of bitching, the same kind of complaints  
about ncurses and pcre breaking existing functionality, all the time. It  
occured to me this week that there is a very obvious and fundamental reason  
why that is so, and it has absolutely nothing to do with any technical  
factor, or complexity. It's more simple, and fundamental than that. And  
that's my puzzle.
I'll just leave a small clue. Both of them have one general attribute in  
common, that's not present in NM, and pretty much every other package that's  
constantly bitched about. Figuring out what it is, will explain a lot. I'll  
just add a postscriptum that this is not an exclusive-or condition. Plenty  
of stuff has a solid reputation for stability, without having this  
particular aspect to it; but stuff that constantly triggers a non-stop  
source of complaints – with few exceptions you can always say one thing  
about it, as a whole.

Attachment: pgpILwLZ4x7Gb.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [EPEL Devel]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux