trends in fedora

[Russell Strong]

Hi,

I've just installed Fedora 9 on my laptop, and unfortunately a few 
things are getting worse in Fedora.

Network management has always been awkward on Fedora and with Fedora 9 
it's getting much worse.

1. I have always edited the config files directly to get things 
working.  And still have to ( it's just a straight forward wireless 
connection ).
2. NetworkManager is now the default on install, BUT...
    2.1 NetworkManager does not give you a wireless connection when no 
user is logged in.
          2.1.1 How am I going to run any network service, NTP, NFS, 
httpd, etc..... without a network?
          2.1.2 How am I going to remotely administer my machines?
    2.2 NetworkManager does not give you the ability to configure system 
wide networking services or policy.
    2.3 NetworkManager does not have any decent documentation.
3. Try using WPA and DHCP at the same time.  It's never worked in this 
or any previous Fedora.  Yes, NM will do it, but that's no good because 
of the previously stated problems.  the network service won't do it 
because it tries to run DHCP immediately after bringing up the 
interfaces...It SHOULD wait until wpa_supplicant has run and the 
interface is available for traffic before kicking off DHCP...

GDM was functional, well behaved and stable in Fedora 8.  I used it to 
log into other F8 machines locked away in difficult to get at racks.  
Fedora 9 has effectively removed that ability by shipping a GDM with 
gdmsetup.  How many users depend on that functionality?  I did, and 
won't be able to upgrade to F9 for any other machines.

A suggestion...

Use the fedora website/wiki to collect information about use cases.  
Find out what people depend on.  Use that to provide a guarantee that 
functionality and usefulness won't go backwards.  If it was ever setup,  
I'd tell you everything I do with my machines.

Russell

[Valent Turkovic]

On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Russell Strong <russell(a)strong.id.au&gt; wrote:
>  Hi,
>
>  I've just installed Fedora 9 on my laptop, and unfortunately a few things
>  are getting worse in Fedora.
>
>  Network management has always been awkward on Fedora and with Fedora 9 it's
>  getting much worse.
>
>  1. I have always edited the config files directly to get things working.
>   And still have to ( it's just a straight forward wireless connection ).
>  2. NetworkManager is now the default on install, BUT...
>    2.1 NetworkManager does not give you a wireless connection when no user is
>  logged in.
>          2.1.1 How am I going to run any network service, NTP, NFS, httpd,
>  etc..... without a network?
>          2.1.2 How am I going to remotely administer my machines?
>    2.2 NetworkManager does not give you the ability to configure system wide
>  networking services or policy.
>    2.3 NetworkManager does not have any decent documentation.
>  3. Try using WPA and DHCP at the same time.  It's never worked in this or
>  any previous Fedora.  Yes, NM will do it, but that's no good because of the
>  previously stated problems.  the network service won't do it because it
>  tries to run DHCP immediately after bringing up the interfaces...It SHOULD
>  wait until wpa_supplicant has run and the interface is available for traffic
>  before kicking off DHCP...
>
>  GDM was functional, well behaved and stable in Fedora 8.  I used it to log
>  into other F8 machines locked away in difficult to get at racks.  Fedora 9
>  has effectively removed that ability by shipping a GDM with gdmsetup.  How
>  many users depend on that functionality?  I did, and won't be able to
>  upgrade to F9 for any other machines.
>
>  A suggestion...
>
>  Use the fedora website/wiki to collect information about use cases.  Find
>  out what people depend on.  Use that to provide a guarantee that
>  functionality and usefulness won't go backwards.  If it was ever setup,  I'd
>  tell you everything I do with my machines.
>
>  Russell
>
>  --
>  fedora-list mailing list
>  fedora-list(a)redhat.com
>  To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>  

Try checking out upstream GDM bug:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=553250

and also gdm mailing list:
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gdm-list

Cheers,
Valent.

-- 
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic

[Rex Dieter]

Bill Davidsen wrote:


>  Given that the network isn't brought up until the user logs in
Checking the "activate device when computer starts" option in
system-config-network works nicely for me.

-- Rex

[g]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Aaron Konstam wrote:
>  That is using ther negteork service not the NM service. 
nice typo.

- --

tc,hago.

g
.

in a free world without fences, who needs gates.

learn linux:
'Rute User's Tutorial and Exposition'   http://rute.2038bug.com/index.html.gz
'The Linux Documentation Project'   http://www.tldp.org/
'HowtoForge'   http://howtoforge.com/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Red Hat - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFI/7Us+C4Bj9Rkw/wRAnrqAKC51yoYjDrKpJzJTGKrd3JzKptr8QCgoyo0
> 4HmsKl4/daKOK7jxP0H8Aps=
> =Pdh7
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Bill Davidsen]

Bill Davidsen wrote:
>  Rex Dieter wrote:
> > Bill Davidsen wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Given that the network isn't brought up until the user logs in
> >
> > Checking the "activate device when computer starts" option in
> > system-config-network works nicely for me.
> >
>  I had the feeling that I needed NM to get wsa working, but I'll try 
>  anything at this point. I'll let you know if that helps.
>   
It appears that the current working solution is to start the interface by hand 
after the system is up, define it in network and keep NM out. It may be that NM 
simply came in with an upgrade at the same time as the breakage, but I'm not 
going back.

The proximate cause seems to be that DHCP tried to set up the NIC before it 
associates, because the supplicant is either not starting early enough or just 
taking too long to get connected. I about 85% sure of that sequence, most o the 
time I get associated but no IP, and my little script doesn't start dhclient 
until the AP is connected.

>  I just wish upgrade would mean "works better" rather than
> "works 
>  differently if at all." This system was dead reliable before the 
>  "security update" came along.
>   
The timing of this startup may well have been right on the edge before the 
upgrade, and making something faster might be the one thing which made it too fast.

Thanks to all who offered ideas, given the ability to generate a script and no 
issues about running it being too inconvenient, I'm regarding this as ugly but 
working.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com&gt;
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot

[Aaron Konstam]

On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 13:03 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
>  Bill Davidsen wrote:
>  
>  
>  > Given that the network isn't brought up until the user logs in
>  
>  Checking the "activate device when computer starts" option in
>  system-config-network works nicely for me.
>  
>  -- Rex
>   
That is using ther negteork service not the NM service.
--
=======================================================================
It's fabulous! We haven't seen anything like it in the last half an
hour! -- Macy's
=======================================================================
Aaron Konstam telephone: [phone] e-mail: akonstam(a)sbcglobal.net

[Bill Davidsen]

Rex Dieter wrote:
>  Bill Davidsen wrote:
>  
>  
> > Given that the network isn't brought up until the user logs in
>  
>  Checking the "activate device when computer starts" option in
>  system-config-network works nicely for me.
>   
I had the feeling that I needed NM to get wsa working, but I'll try anything
at 
this point. I'll let you know if that helps.

I just wish upgrade would mean "works better" rather than "works
differently if 
at all." This system was dead reliable before the "security update" came
along.
;-(

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com&gt;
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot

[Bill Davidsen]

Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>  On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Russell Strong
> <russell(a)strong.id.au&gt; wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've just installed Fedora 9 on my laptop, and unfortunately a few things
> > are getting worse in Fedora.
> >
> > Network management has always been awkward on Fedora and with Fedora 9 it's
> > getting much worse.
> >
> > 1. I have always edited the config files directly to get things working.
> >  And still have to ( it's just a straight forward wireless connection ).
>  
>  Wireless isn't straightforward in Linux at all, mostly due to hardware issues.
>   
When something works without configuration in the initial release of FC9 and 
stops after a NetworkManager update, I would bet a six pack of good beer that 
hardware isn't the issue.

> > 2. NetworkManager is now the default on install, BUT...
>  
>  Wireless was unworkable for me before NetworkManager
>  
> >   2.1 NetworkManager does not give you a wireless connection when no user is
> > logged in.
>  
>  I think, while that may be a short coming, it is fairly standard
>  between GNU/Linux and Windows (possibly Mac). At least with Linux, you
>  can get around that, one day, maybe even using NetworkManager
>   
You can get around it by disabling or even removing NM and setting the network 
code correctly. Or better yet using a script run rc.sysinit. NM just runs way 
too late to be of use.

> >         2.1.1 How am I going to run any network service, NTP,
> NFS, httpd,
> > etc..... without a network?
>  
>  I don't think servers using wireless cards as their primary route is a
>  target use case of NetworkManager yet. 
Given that the network isn't brought up until the user logs in I don't think 
"server" is at issue here, other than the ones you can't reach. As in
mounting 
home files on NFS, as in using LDAP, RADIUS, or Kerberos to validate the login, 
etc, etc. In other words the whole NM concept is wrong, it's "Windows think"

ported to Linux, ignoring the common case where the computer does something 
useful other than wait for a keystroke.

>  For clients, I'm not sure what the idea is for NTP, and using
> autofs
>  to mount your NFS shares will fix this issue.
>  
> >         2.1.2 How am I going to remotely administer my machines?
>  
>  Seems like you'll need an init script to setup some default wireless connection
>   
You have that right, but it's the kind of think NM could and should be doing.

And I don't think autofs is much good when you have no network until you log in. :-(

> >   2.2 NetworkManager does not give you the ability to configure
> system wide
> > networking services or policy.
>  
>  I'm not sure what you mean here, so I withhold comments
>   
The network is not a user resource, it is a system resource (in most cases). 
Setting up the network should be an administrative thing. NM was designed for 
Joe Hacker, who is competent, to be able to configure the network. Think Suzie 
Smallbiz, who provides these to sales critters and management, and want IT to be 
the only part of the organization toughing the network settings. Think corporate 
VPN, etc.

NM should be usable from the boot rc files (easily) and available only under 
controlled access to the rest of the users.

> >   2.3 NetworkManager does not have any decent documentation.
>  
>  Fair problem
>  
> > 3. Try using WPA and DHCP at the same time.It's never worked in this or
> > any previous Fedora.  Yes, NM will do it, but that's no good because of the
> > previously stated problems.
>  
>  Here, I suggest you try to work closesly with the NetworkManager devs
>  to solve the problems you have with it, as NM is meant to solve
>  problems like this.
>   
See above, I can't say it won't, but I do say I believe it's the wrong
problem, 
and NM sould be easily (and usually) used as a configured system resource, not 
restricted to user use by lack of interface (or documentation).

> > the network service won't do it because it
> > tries to run DHCP immediately after bringing up the interfaces...It SHOULD
> > wait until wpa_supplicant has run and the interface is available for traffic
> > before kicking off DHCP...
>  
>  Again, I don't think that servers using wifi+dhpc without a logged in
>  user is as yet a target use case for NM. If you can suggest tweaks to
>  the devs, maybe they can implement them for you
>   
See above, these aren't servers.


-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com&gt;
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Russell Strong <russell(a)strong.id.au&gt; wrote:
>  Hi,
>
>  I've just installed Fedora 9 on my laptop, and unfortunately a few things
>  are getting worse in Fedora.
>
>  Network management has always been awkward on Fedora and with Fedora 9 it's
>  getting much worse.
>
>  1. I have always edited the config files directly to get things working.
>   And still have to ( it's just a straight forward wireless connection ). 
Wireless isn't straightforward in Linux at all, mostly due to hardware issues.

>  2. NetworkManager is now the default on install, BUT... 
Wireless was unworkable for me before NetworkManager

>    2.1 NetworkManager does not give you a wireless connection when no
> user is
>  logged in. 
I think, while that may be a short coming, it is fairly standard
between GNU/Linux and Windows (possibly Mac). At least with Linux, you
can get around that, one day, maybe even using NetworkManager

>          2.1.1 How am I going to run any network service, NTP, NFS,
> httpd,
>  etc..... without a network? 
I don't think servers using wireless cards as their primary route is a
target use case of NetworkManager yet.
For clients, I'm not sure what the idea is for NTP, and using autofs
to mount your NFS shares will fix this issue.

>          2.1.2 How am I going to remotely administer my machines?
Seems like you'll need an init script to setup some default wireless connection

>    2.2 NetworkManager does not give you the ability to configure
> system wide
>  networking services or policy. 
I'm not sure what you mean here, so I withhold comments

>    2.3 NetworkManager does not have any decent documentation. 
Fair problem

>  3. Try using WPA and DHCP at the same time.It's never worked in
> this or
>  any previous Fedora.  Yes, NM will do it, but that's no good because of the
>  previously stated problems. 
Here, I suggest you try to work closesly with the NetworkManager devs
to solve the problems you have with it, as NM is meant to solve
problems like this.

>  the network service won't do it because it
>  tries to run DHCP immediately after bringing up the interfaces...It SHOULD
>  wait until wpa_supplicant has run and the interface is available for traffic
>  before kicking off DHCP... 
Again, I don't think that servers using wifi+dhpc without a logged in
user is as yet a target use case for NM. If you can suggest tweaks to
the devs, maybe they can implement them for you

>  GDM was functional, well behaved and stable in Fedora 8.  I used it
> to log
>  into other F8 machines locked away in difficult to get at racks.  Fedora 9
>  has effectively removed that ability by shipping a GDM with gdmsetup.  How
>  many users depend on that functionality?  I did, and won't be able to
>  upgrade to F9 for any other machines. 
Well, a few things here. I don't use GDM myself. 'Login' here is
pretty ambiguous. Since you mentioned GDM, I'll assume GUI login via
VNC. I'm surprised to here that logging with VNC via the default login
greeter isn't working. GUIs on remote racks may not be a popular, well
tested use case (I think most people associate headless with GUI less)

>  A suggestion... 
1) Consider a slower paced distro like Centos if it suits your needs
2) You seem to have a fairly serious setup going, your input on
shotcomings, along with details of your use cases may be very useful.
I suggest filing bugs and RFEs, and hope for positive responses.

>  Use the fedora website/wiki to collect information about use cases. 
> Find
>  out what people depend on.  Use that to provide a guarantee that
>  functionality and usefulness won't go backwards.  If it was ever setup,  I'd
>  tell you everything I do with my machines. 
Your on track with this, but I suggest using bugzilla.redhat.com. The
wiki isn't (at least not yet) the best place for this.

>  Russell 


-- 
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )