Re: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy
Ben Hutchings <email@example.com> writes:
> On Sat, 2011-04-02 at 23:07 +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> Josselin Mouette <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> > Le jeudi 31 mars 2011 à 09:25 +0200, Vincent Danjean a écrit :
>> >> Martin F. Krafft started to implement a replacement of ifupdown that
>> >> is better designed. But, due to lack of manpower I think, this project
>> >> did not finish. See this archives of email@example.com
>> >> for more info.
>> > I wonder what amount of features we are missing for network-manager to
>> > do the job; instead of rewriting a daemon from scratch,
>> A daemon will never be able to replace ifupdown.
> ifupdown will never work correctly.
Point taken. Sorry about the noise.
udevd has demonstrated that it is possible for a daemon to manage and
police all devices in a system, while still keeping the kernel as
"master of state". You can actually restart udevd without having all
you disk devices removed and readded. Of course.
So a daemon could do the job. NM, however, can not.
I believe the problems with NM is best described by it's current list of
bugs, and in particular by the maintainer responses to bugs like
#415196. NM can probably be used for really simple desktop setups, but
it is not suitable for any non-desktop setup or any non-trivial