On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 9:05 AM Ben Cotton <bcotton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoIfcfgFiles > > == Summary == > Do not not include NetworkManager support for legacy network > configuration files by in new installations. > > == Owner == > * Name: [[User:Lkundrak| Lubomir Rintel]] > * Email: <lkundrak@xxxxx> > > * Name: Ana Cabral > * Email: <acabral@xxxxxxxxxx> > > * Name: [[User:Thaller| Thomas Haller]] > * Email: <thaller@xxxxxxxxxx> > > == Detailed Description == > Long ago, network was configured using "network" service. > It was essentially a set of shell scripts, that sourced snippets of > configuration from `/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-*` ("ifcfg > files"). > The ifcfg files compatible with the legacy network service were kept > when NetworkManager was intruduced. > > As the NetworkManager feature set was expanding beyond what the legacy > network service could support, > the ifcfg files written by NetworkManager could no longer be > guarranteed to be compatible. > NetworkManager eventually gained support for connection types > completely unknown to the legacy network service > and ended up using a more streamlined configuration file format for > those, known as keyfile. > > NetworkManager's use of various configuration files is, in fact, > configurable and extensible with plugins. > Prior to Fedora 33, NetworkManager by default was configured to enable > both ifcfg files and keyfiles, with the former taking precedence when > possible. > The precedence changed in > [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NetworkManager_keyfile_instead_of_ifcfg_rh > Fedora 33] to perfer keyfile. > > The precedence has an effect when a network connection profile is created. > Once the connection profile exists, NetworkManager is unable to > convert the profile to a different configuration backend. > This makes it necessary for NetworkManager to support the same feature > set in all configuration backend. > Given the complexities stemming from historical legacy of ifcfg files > not being designed (or documented) in a > particularly forward-looking way, this has been a huge and complex > effort with all the downsides: > The ifcfg support code is huge (130K lines, not counting the enormous > test suite) and has constantly been a source of bugs. > > == Benefit to Fedora == > This change removes a body of code that has a large cost in terms of > bugs and maintenance at questionable benefit. > > It slightly reduces the default installation size. > > == Scope == > * Proposal owners: Split the ifcfg plugin into a subpackage package. > Make sure the ifcfg plugin stays on upgrades. Provide a migration > tool. > > * Other developers: N/A > > * Release engineering: N/A > > * Policies and guidelines: N/A > > * Trademark approval: N/A > > * Alignment with Objectives: N/A > > == Upgrade/compatibility impact == > For the time being the ifcfg plugin is kept around, albeit in a > sub-package that's not included in new installations. > The appropriate RPM tags will ensure the sub-package with the ifcfg > plugin will be installed on upgrades. > A migration tool will be provided for users who'd like to remove the > legacy package from their systems after upgrade. > > == How To Test == > N/A. > The keyfiles are used by default in Fedora 33 already, so any problem > with them would've already been spotted. > > == User Experience == > Regular users will not notice anything. > Users of old installations with ifcfg files will get the new > sub-package on upgrade. > New systems will default to use keyfiles, which is not something > regulars user would notice. > > System integrators and administrators might use tools that drop in > ifcfg files during automated installations (e.g. via kickstart or a > configration management tool). > They will need to update their tools -- convert the ifcfg files to > keyfiles or include the ifcfg sub-package. > > == Dependencies == > N/A > > == Contingency Plan == > * Contingency mechanism: If it turns out we can't drop support for > ifcfg files by default, we can either fold the ifcfg sub-package back > into the main NetworkManager package or make sure it is included in > new installations (via comps change). > * Contingency deadline: Any time. > * Blocks release? No. > > == Documentation == > We'll need to write the documentation for the migration tool. > Perhaps also something the sysadmins wondering why their ifcfg files > don't work anymore could find and refer to. > > TODO: Update this once it's done. > > == Release Notes == > We'll need to include a paragraph about this in the release notes. > > TODO: Update this with the actual release note text. > This will break cloud-init, since it doesn't know how to configure NetworkManager directly. It only knows how to configure netplan (which isn't packaged in Fedora currently), ifcfg-rh, and ifupdown configuration files. If you want to do this, you need to extend cloud-init to be able to configure NetworkManager properly. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
