On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 01:30:00PM +0200, Lukáš Nykrýn wrote: > Dne 25.4.2014 13:24, Reindl Harald napsal(a): > > > > > >Am 25.04.2014 13:12, schrieb Lukáš Nykrýn: > >>Dne 25.4.2014 12:50, Reindl Harald napsal(a): > >>>Am 25.04.2014 12:40, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: > >>>>On 04/24/2014 04:30 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>Only those that are maintained directly inside Fedora. > >>>> > >>>>Which is what we care about we cannot hold back progress in the > >>>>distribution based on someone, someplace, somewhere might be using > >>>>legacy cruff. > >>> > >>>have you ever heard "if it ain't broken don't fix it" > >>>network.service works fine until someone decides to break it intentionally > >>> > >>network initscript *is* broken > > > >no - such generalizations are always wrong > >it does not fit for every setup and it don't pretend that > > > >proven by over 30 F19/F20 setups in a wide range from virtualized servers > >with simple setups to physical hardware with multiple network cards, virtual > >TAP devices acting as routers, firewalls, WLAN accesspoints and VPN servers > >with up to 5 decdicated openvpn-instances with their own keys, ports and > >TAP devices it works for a lot of environments and they never will change > >because that is why virtualization is used > > > >>During rhel7 beta I have discovered a lot of design flaws when people tried to use > >>it on some advance hardware. Boot in fedora is now quite asynchronous and network > >>is unable to cope with that. For example we have already removed the hotplug script. > > > >network.service is not for hotplug > >it is for static configurations > > > >>And I really don't want to end with NM on laptops, network on simple servers > >>and networkd elsewhere > > > >i really won't end with NM on simple virtual servers with one virtual NIC > >so just don't break network.service intentionally because it does not fit > >your usecases > > > >i don't demand you to you use network.service so don#t demand others > >using NM and completly rebuild complex working setups - that's not > >progress, that's just making development-noise to let people feel > >there was done some work the hard way and they have to chew it > > > I agree. I also don't think that NM is the best solution for such > use-cases. I believe that this is a place for networkd and I will > not remove network initscript until networkd covers that. Or even keep it around in its subpackage... maybe for a whole release cycle. It doesn't really hold back other changes in any way. Zbyszek -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
