NetworkManager-resolv.conf -

[Tim]

On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 10:37 +0800, Zind wrote:
> I have already seen quite a lot posts about this NetworkManager issue
> on serveral mailing lists.

I've seen it discussed, for a long time.  There's a mixture of it
behaving in ways people didn't like, and people messing with their
system without really knowing what they're doing.

> So, maybe NetworkManager should change the way it works? I'm not sure.

That's also difficult to answer.  For quite some time, it was clear that
it was only aimed at the GUI users, as there was only a GUI interface
for it.  Command line usage came later on.  It is supposedly possible to
do what people have been wanting to do, with the GUI, if only they
bothered trying to use it.  It's clear, from many of the discussions,
that they haven't.

Some people might like it if it fitted in more with the traditionally
networking configuration, but the old method had its drawbacks, as well.
Particularly when it comes to multiple networks.  The presumption was,
particularly with ethernet, that you were only ever part of one network.
About the only place dynamic network changes were expected was with
dial-up, and even then I found it painful to use a system with more than
one dial-up ISP.  Then, later on, comes the widespread use of wireless
LANs, making a need for variable changing LAN configuration, too.  That
was something that didn't work well before NetworkManager.

But just how would NetworkManager read traditional network configuration
files, to begin with, then incorporate them into what it's going to do,
when the traditional method tends to have just one ethernet
configuration file, for one network?  Sure, it could work if
NetworkManager only kept connecting to the same network.  But it could
be somewhat of a schmozzle to try and make it work with several
different networks.  Which gives some insight into why it does what it
does, in the way that it does.

A large part of the problem seems to resolve around how a lot of modern
networking expects you to be using a client that's configured by DHCP,
yet users want static setups without DHCP.  But rather than stop their
computer using DHCP, they try to jam static information in over the top
of a DHCP client configuration.

-- 
[tim at localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.