On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 01:15:37PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> said: > > Mind if I ask why you think this way about NetworkManager? The NM > > currently shipping in Fedora 19 has full support for managing static > > NICs, as well as bonding, bridging and VLAN support for enterprise > > use-cases. > > I think most "traditional" system admins see a running NM daemon as an > additional point of failure in a static network. If my server's network > setup is static, I don't want a daemon running attempting to "manage" > it. If it has a bug, gets misconfigured, etc., it might do something to > screw up an otherwise working setup. > > I understand that some servers/setups may be able to take advantage of > NM functionality, but assuming that all servers _need_ NM is too much. > This is all IMHO of course. I have no skin in this game, since I dislike both NM and the "traditional" scripts. Here's what I think they should do[*]: (1) systemctl mask NetworkManager.service (2) Write a shell script that contains the ifconfig/route add (or ip ...) commands they need and have it run at boot. Most simple static network configs are 2 or 3 commands at most. Rich. [*] Not actually tried this outside of simple VMs ... -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
