Marc Herbert wrote, On 05/27/2009 11:24 AM:
Mads Kiilerich a écrit :(My specific use case is an appliance where I use NM for wireless but don't want it to control eth0. Obviously the eth0 MAC address varies, and storing it in ifcfg is problematic.)Why do need to install NetworkManager in the first place? Isn't the old ifcfg alone working just fine?
I "need" (or rather: would like to use) NM for wireless and other random connections. That is what NM is good at, and I don't know other (good) ways to achieve do that. At the same time I have eth0 which has a static server/service configuration best handled The Old Way. So it seems like NM_CONTROLLED=no fits the bill and could make it work as expected.
The more I (try to) use NM and the more I read this list the more I feel like NM is meant only for desktop people not doing anything weird or unusual with their network configuration. NM seems to have "NM_CONTROLLED=yes" written all over its DNA, as explained here: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/networkmanager-list/2009-April/msg00324.html "The only way you can make intelligent decisions about the network state on the machine is to make those decisions with *all* the necessary information, and that means letting NetworkManager control all your network connections."
Yes, but it _do_ have a NM_CONTROLLED=no option which seems to be the answer to many questions. It almost answered mine ;-)
/Mads
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature