Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
96 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Ignacio Areta
Hello list,

So, the question is in the subject. I'd like to understand the motivation behind this choice. In my opinion, NetworkManager should be the default for network setup. The use of ifup doesn't show any advantage: configuration for WiFi is problematic (and sometimes for wired networks too), it increases the startup time and the service doesn't restart properly.

OK, NetworkManager has its problems too, but it's a better solution than this, specially for newbies in this distro.

So, does someone have any plans to change this?

Ignacio    --
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Felix Miata-3
On 2013-12-03 22:44 (GMT-0200) Ignacio Areta composed:

> So, the question is in the subject. I'd like to understand the motivation
> behind this choice. In my opinion, NetworkManager should be the default
> for network setup. The use of ifup doesn't show any advantage:
> configuration for WiFi is problematic (and sometimes for wired networks
> too), it increases the startup time and the service doesn't restart
> properly.

> OK, NetworkManager has its problems too, but it's a better solution than
> this, specially for newbies in this distro.

> So, does someone have any plans to change this?

I hope no default change any time before NM does more maturing. Ifup is KISS,
much better for the many systems using a single more secure wired connection
and needing 0 "management", especially by a complicated, larger and buggy
manager.
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Ignacio Areta-2
So, ifup only works if you have a desktop with a single wired card (which appears to be your case).. But this is not the major group. A lot of people has wireless cards, and ifup doesn't work in these case.. There's a lot of situatios like this, including, the review of 13.1 in DistroWatch.
distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20131202#feature

In my case, I have 2 wired cards. In ifup, I only can switch with these card if I restart te system, becauase systemctl restart network.service doesn't work, probably because it is an ugly shell script. With NetworkManager, I even needs to restart the service, but systemctl restart NetworkManager works properly (and disabling and enabling the network through the utility on KDE/GNOME work too). And also, with a single wired card, I don't see problems with NM.

Ignacio
----------------------------------------

> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 20:10:03 -0500
> From: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [opensuse-factory] Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?
>
> On 2013-12-03 22:44 (GMT-0200) Ignacio Areta composed:
>
>> So, the question is in the subject. I'd like to understand the motivation
>> behind this choice. In my opinion, NetworkManager should be the default
>> for network setup. The use of ifup doesn't show any advantage:
>> configuration for WiFi is problematic (and sometimes for wired networks
>> too), it increases the startup time and the service doesn't restart
>> properly.
>
>> OK, NetworkManager has its problems too, but it's a better solution than
>> this, specially for newbies in this distro.
>
>> So, does someone have any plans to change this?
>
> I hope no default change any time before NM does more maturing. Ifup is KISS,
> much better for the many systems using a single more secure wired connection
> and needing 0 "management", especially by a complicated, larger and buggy
> manager.
> --
> "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
> words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
>
> Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
>
> Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]
>    --
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Claudio Freire
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Ignacio Areta <[hidden email]> wrote:
> In my case, I have 2 wired cards. In ifup, I only can switch with these card if I restart te system, becauase systemctl restart network.service doesn't work, probably because it is an ugly shell script. With NetworkManager

With NetworkManager, management of system-wide interfaces was quite
broken, at least last time I tried (12.1 perhaps). User-manageable
interfaces only start working after you log in, and that can be a
problem for a few services (think shared printers, or shared
whatever).

In essence, ifup is the only mature solution for system-wide
interfaces, and it works perfectly fine for me. I have a desktop 12.X
(can't remember the X) with ifup-managed USB wireless (because its
onboard ethernet adapter is busted) and it works flawless, it even
restarts properly after suspend.

If you have problems with ifup, report them as bugs. It's not a design
limitation so it doesn't warrant a default change.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

James Knott
In reply to this post by Ignacio Areta
Ignacio Areta wrote:
> In my opinion, NetworkManager should be the default for network setup.

For computers that are always connected via Ethernet, I prefer ifup.  It
provides more flexibility than NetworkManager.  Also, it can connect on
boot up, whereas NetworkManager doesn't connect untill after login.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Jim Henderson-4
In reply to this post by Claudio Freire
On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 00:00:18 -0200, Claudio Freire wrote:

> With NetworkManager, management of system-wide interfaces was quite
> broken, at least last time I tried (12.1 perhaps). User-manageable
> interfaces only start working after you log in, and that can be a
> problem for a few services (think shared printers, or shared whatever).

Yep, and this is a big problem for systems that don't have a user login
but provide services (headless systems should always use ifup, admittedly
that's not a primary install base here).  I know when my wife's laptop
starts freaking out, one thing that can happen is that the GUI doesn't
start up completely, and since it hasn't started up, there's no network
access for me to connect to to diagnose it.

ifup is simple, stable, and reliable.  That's enough reason to keep it as
the default.

Jim

--
 Jim Henderson
 Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Larry Finger
On 12/03/2013 08:10 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 00:00:18 -0200, Claudio Freire wrote:
>
>> With NetworkManager, management of system-wide interfaces was quite
>> broken, at least last time I tried (12.1 perhaps). User-manageable
>> interfaces only start working after you log in, and that can be a
>> problem for a few services (think shared printers, or shared whatever).
>
> Yep, and this is a big problem for systems that don't have a user login
> but provide services (headless systems should always use ifup, admittedly
> that's not a primary install base here).  I know when my wife's laptop
> starts freaking out, one thing that can happen is that the GUI doesn't
> start up completely, and since it hasn't started up, there's no network
> access for me to connect to to diagnose it.
>
> ifup is simple, stable, and reliable.  That's enough reason to keep it as
> the default.

My experience is that if you install on a system with a single wired interface,
the installer selects ifup, but if you also have wireless, NM is the method. I
don't have any systems with 2 wired interfaces, thus I don't know what happens.

To me, trying to control wireless with ifup is an impossible task. I have 5 APs
and about 30 different wireless interfaces that I use for testing. Generating
all the necessary ifcfg-wlXXXX files would be the only thing I would ever get done.

Larry


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Ilya Chernykh
In reply to this post by Ignacio Areta
On Wednesday 04 December 2013 04:44:51 Ignacio Areta wrote:

> So, the question is in the subject. I'd like to understand the motivation behind this choice. In my opinion, NetworkManager should be the default for network setup. The use of ifup doesn't show any advantage: configuration for WiFi is problematic (and sometimes for wired networks too), it increases the startup time and the service doesn't restart properly.
>
> OK, NetworkManager has its problems too, but it's a better solution than this, specially for newbies in this distro.
>
> So, does someone have any plans to change this?

* Sometimes graphical boot fails, for example, when video drivers not properly installed. In this case Network Manager does not work, and there is no access to the repositories.

* Most desktop environments do not have a Network Manager front-end.

* Network manager cannot keep the connection between user sessions, when changing the user or a desktop.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Ilya Chernykh
In reply to this post by Claudio Freire
On Wednesday 04 December 2013 06:00:18 Claudio Freire wrote:

> > In my case, I have 2 wired cards. In ifup, I only can switch with these card if I restart te system, becauase systemctl restart network.service doesn't work, probably because it is an ugly shell script. With NetworkManager
>
> With NetworkManager, management of system-wide interfaces was quite
> broken, at least last time I tried (12.1 perhaps). User-manageable
> interfaces only start working after you log in, and that can be a
> problem for a few services (think shared printers, or shared
> whatever).

Also, NTP, weather applets etc.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Ilya Chernykh
In reply to this post by Larry Finger
On Wednesday 04 December 2013 06:39:58 Larry Finger wrote:

> To me, trying to control wireless with ifup is an impossible task. I have 5 APs
> and about 30 different wireless interfaces that I use for testing. Generating
> all the necessary ifcfg-wlXXXX files would be the only thing I would ever get done.

ifup/wi-fi works well here on a notebook, at least on oS 11.4.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Dmitriy Perlow
In reply to this post by Ilya Chernykh
Ilya Chernykh <[hidden email]>  Wed, 04 Dec 2013 06:20:12 +0300:

> * Sometimes graphical boot fails, for example, when video drivers not  
> properly installed. In this case Network Manager does not work, and  
> there is no access to the repositories.
>
> * Most desktop environments do not have a Network Manager front-end.

NM has a cli interface. Of course a default connection will be plugged in  
automatically without X.


--
Best regards,
Dmitriy DA(P).DarkneSS Perlow @ Linux x64
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Patrick Shanahan-2
In reply to this post by Ignacio Areta
* Ignacio Areta <[hidden email]> [12-03-13 19:45]:
> So, the question is in the subject. I'd like to understand the
> motivation behind this choice.  In my opinion, NetworkManager should be
> the default for network setup.  The use of ifup doesn't show any
> advantage: configuration for WiFi is problematic (and sometimes for
> wired networks too), it increases the startup time and the service
> doesn't restart properly.
>
> OK, NetworkManager has its problems too, but it's a better solution than
> this, specially for newbies in this distro.

Yes, for me NetworkManager has major, critical problems.  It doesn't work
and hasn't since it came out.  The *only* way I have network connection is
via ifup.  And that is on three boxes, one is wireless.
 
> So, does someone have any plans to change this?

I surely hope not!

--
(paka)Patrick Shanahan       Plainfield, Indiana, USA          @ptilopteri
http://en.opensuse.org    openSUSE Community Member    facebook/ptilopteri
http://wahoo.no-ip.org        Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
Registered Linux User #207535                    @ http://linuxcounter.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Roman Bysh
On Tue 03 Dec 2013 11:04:27 PM EST, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

> * Ignacio Areta <[hidden email]> [12-03-13 19:45]:
>> So, the question is in the subject. I'd like to understand the
>> motivation behind this choice.  In my opinion, NetworkManager should be
>> the default for network setup.  The use of ifup doesn't show any
>> advantage: configuration for WiFi is problematic (and sometimes for
>> wired networks too), it increases the startup time and the service
>> doesn't restart properly.
>>
>> OK, NetworkManager has its problems too, but it's a better solution than
>> this, specially for newbies in this distro.
>
> Yes, for me NetworkManager has major, critical problems.  It doesn't work
> and hasn't since it came out.  The *only* way I have network connection is
> via ifup.  And that is on three boxes, one is wireless.
>
>> So, does someone have any plans to change this?
>
> I surely hope not!
>
This is 2nd or 3rd openSUSE distro release with a NetworkManager that
doesn't autostart.
Maybe the fourth time (13.2) will be the charm. ;-)


Cheers!

Roman

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Claudio Freire
In reply to this post by Larry Finger
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Larry Finger <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> ifup is simple, stable, and reliable.  That's enough reason to keep it as
>> the default.
>
>
> My experience is that if you install on a system with a single wired
> interface, the installer selects ifup, but if you also have wireless, NM is
> the method. I don't have any systems with 2 wired interfaces, thus I don't
> know what happens.
>
> To me, trying to control wireless with ifup is an impossible task. I have 5
> APs and about 30 different wireless interfaces that I use for testing.
> Generating all the necessary ifcfg-wlXXXX files would be the only thing I
> would ever get done.


yast helps a lot there.

I think I configured wlan manually once, and it was the last time. I
fell in love with yast again after that.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Larry Finger
In reply to this post by Ilya Chernykh
On 12/03/2013 09:26 PM, Ilya Chernykh wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 December 2013 06:39:58 Larry Finger wrote:
>
>> To me, trying to control wireless with ifup is an impossible task. I have 5 APs
>> and about 30 different wireless interfaces that I use for testing. Generating
>> all the necessary ifcfg-wlXXXX files would be the only thing I would ever get done.
>
> ifup/wi-fi works well here on a notebook, at least on oS 11.4.

It works here with 13.1, and I have one machine that runs text only with ifup
for network control. For machines that run X, I have an AP using WPA2 with
802.11n, another for WPA with 802.11g, and a third for WEP. To test a particular
device with each of these, all I need to do is click on the NM applet display.
With ifup, I would need to either edit the ifcfg-xxxx file, or run YaST and
reconfigure the device. Considering multiple wireless devices makes the problem
even more complicated with ifup.

Larry

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Michal Hrusecky
In reply to this post by Ignacio Areta
Ignacio Areta - 22:44  3.12.13 wrote:

> Hello list,
>
> So, the question is in the subject. I'd like to understand the motivation
> behind this choice. In my opinion, NetworkManager should be the default for
> network setup. The use of ifup doesn't show any advantage: configuration for
> WiFi is problematic (and sometimes for wired networks too), it increases the
> startup time and the service doesn't restart properly.
>
> OK, NetworkManager has its problems too, but it's a better solution than
> this, specially for newbies in this distro.
>
> So, does someone have any plans to change this?
>

Isn't it default if you install with KDE/Gnome? Last time I did test KDE
installation I ended up with it.

In general, it might be reasonable default if you have WiFi and KDE/Gnome.
Otherwise network scripts does what you need them to do and are totally hidden
from user so he doesn't need to care.

<flame>Apart from that, network scripts and easier to configure and more user
friendly, they are just more picky who they are friends with :-)</flame>

<flame>But don't worry, it will get integrated into systemd soon ;-)</flame>

--
Michal HRUSECKY                                   SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.
openSUSE Team                                     Lihovarska 1060/12
PGP 0xFED656F6                                         19000 Praha 9
mhrusecky[at]suse.cz                                  Czech Republic
http://michal.hrusecky.net                        http://www.suse.cz
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Clayton-29
In reply to this post by Patrick Shanahan-2
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Patrick Shanahan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> * Ignacio Areta <[hidden email]> [12-03-13 19:45]:
>> So, the question is in the subject. I'd like to understand the
>> motivation behind this choice.  In my opinion, NetworkManager should be
>> the default for network setup.  The use of ifup doesn't show any
>> advantage: configuration for WiFi is problematic (and sometimes for
>> wired networks too), it increases the startup time and the service
>> doesn't restart properly.
>>
>> OK, NetworkManager has its problems too, but it's a better solution than
>> this, specially for newbies in this distro.
>
> Yes, for me NetworkManager has major, critical problems.  It doesn't work
> and hasn't since it came out.  The *only* way I have network connection is
> via ifup.  And that is on three boxes, one is wireless.
>
>> So, does someone have any plans to change this?
>
> I surely hope not!


The ONLY time ifup has worked for me on dozens and dozens of installs
is if I had wired NIC.  This was the case in the past, but now, none
of the systems I work with have wired NIC.

With all systems I install now, I have to switch on NetworkManager to
get WiFi working right.  I have zero network capabilities until that
happens.  openSUSE does NOT have any network with the ifup default on
any system I administer until after it boots, and until after I
manually reconfigure it to use NM.  I've tried to configure WiFi with
ifup (through YaST), but I've had mixed results... mostly fail going
that route, and it's needlessly complicated, especially for new users.

So.. the scenarios presented with "keep ifup because I'll always have
network" are a complete non-starter in 100% of my use cases.  I never
once have had network with ifup... in systems that have WiFi.  I
really hate the ifup default... for me it's the biggest PITA with
installing openSUSE, and I find my self constantly apologizing to
people I assist (users new to openSUSE) with installing.

If there was a way to "fix" this on install... allow the user to
choose ifup or NM... would that resolve it?

C.
--
openSUSE 12.3 x86_64, KDE 4.11
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Michal Hrusecky
In reply to this post by Larry Finger
Larry Finger - 20:39  3.12.13 wrote:
> To me, trying to control wireless with ifup is an impossible task. I
> have 5 APs and about 30 different wireless interfaces that I use for
> testing. Generating all the necessary ifcfg-wlXXXX files would be
> the only thing I would ever get done.

In config file, you can provide full path to custom wpa_supplicant file where
you have all the information stored and afterward you can even use wpa_gui
(probably would work even without the custom config file).

This is how I have my network setup on my laptop.

--
Michal HRUSECKY                                   SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.
openSUSE Team                                     Lihovarska 1060/12
PGP 0xFED656F6                                         19000 Praha 9
mhrusecky[at]suse.cz                                  Czech Republic
http://michal.hrusecky.net                        http://www.suse.cz
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Claudio Freire
In reply to this post by Clayton-29
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:35 AM, C <[hidden email]> wrote:
> If there was a way to "fix" this on install... allow the user to
> choose ifup or NM... would that resolve it?


AFAIK, there is that choice, at least in advanced mode.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why openSUSE still uses ifup by default?

Clayton-29
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Claudio Freire <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:35 AM, C <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> If there was a way to "fix" this on install... allow the user to
>> choose ifup or NM... would that resolve it?
>
>
> AFAIK, there is that choice, at least in advanced mode.

If it's there... then what about swapping? Set NM for default and
leave it to those that know what they are doing to use advanced
install and select ifup where it makes sense.

This way you satisfy the needs of new users who need a simple NM
interface and don't understand the dif between ifup and NM nor have
teh slightest clue how to configure and use supplicant files, the
needs of those who need NM like I do for the endless string of WiFi
only systems, and the advanced users who need ifup.

C.
--
openSUSE 12.3 x86_64, KDE 4.11
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

12345