Daniel P. Berrange
berrange at redhat.com
Mon Nov 29 10:11:45 UTC 2010
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:24:34AM +0100, Olaf Kirch wrote:
> On Thursday 25 November 2010 21:29:30 Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 05:24:37PM +0100, Olaf Kirch wrote:
> > > You may ask, don't we have enough of those already? Don't we have
> > > NetworkManager, connman, netcf, and a few more?
> > Indeed ... You don't explain how it's better than netcf.
> That's because I'm not a huge fan of introducing my code by dissing other
> people's projects :-)
> Okay, so here's where I see the significant differences
> netcf, from what I have seen so far, converts between sysconfig files
> and XML using a combination of augeas and XSLT. To bring up and shut
> down interfaces, it continues to rely on ifup/ifdown scripts. Is that
> an accurate description?
Fairly accurate. The goal of netcf is *not* to be a general networking
management service. It is to provide a stable library ABI for reading
and writing network configuration files. It it thus positioned to sit
underneath network manager or any other end user networking management
service that requires use of network config files.
> This has a number of problems, I believe
> 1. ifcfg files are dead
That's not a strictly problem given the scope of netcf, if there are
no config files, then there's no need to use netcf.
> 2. Why a daemon, not a library
netcf isn't intended to be a general service, solely a tool for reliably
reading & writing the configuration files.
> 3. Why not NetworkManager?
Netcf is intended to be used by NM, rather than to replace it. Any
app which needs to read/write network config files would use it.
More information about the devel