On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:24:34AM +0100, Olaf Kirch wrote: > On Thursday 25 November 2010 21:29:30 Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 05:24:37PM +0100, Olaf Kirch wrote: > > > You may ask, don't we have enough of those already? Don't we have > > > NetworkManager, connman, netcf, and a few more? > > > > Indeed ... You don't explain how it's better than netcf. > > That's because I'm not a huge fan of introducing my code by dissing other > people's projects :-) > > Okay, so here's where I see the significant differences > > netcf, from what I have seen so far, converts between sysconfig files > and XML using a combination of augeas and XSLT. To bring up and shut > down interfaces, it continues to rely on ifup/ifdown scripts. Is that > an accurate description? Fairly accurate. The goal of netcf is *not* to be a general networking management service. It is to provide a stable library ABI for reading and writing network configuration files. It it thus positioned to sit underneath network manager or any other end user networking management service that requires use of network config files. > This has a number of problems, I believe > 1. ifcfg files are dead That's not a strictly problem given the scope of netcf, if there are no config files, then there's no need to use netcf. > 2. Why a daemon, not a library netcf isn't intended to be a general service, solely a tool for reliably reading & writing the configuration files. > 3. Why not NetworkManager? Netcf is intended to be used by NM, rather than to replace it. Any app which needs to read/write network config files would use it. Regards, Daniel -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
