Re: ANN: NetworkManager 0.9.9.95 (0.9.10-beta1) released

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 17:11 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 17.06.2014 16:50, schrieb Michael Biebl:
>
> > I also noticed that you implemented pre-up and pre-down in the
> > dispatcher and that there are now dedicated directories in
> > /etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/pre-down.d
> > /etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/pre-up.d
> >
> > That seems a bit inconsistent with how currently dispatcher scripts are
> > handled, i.e. the "phase" is passed as $2 to scripts in
> > /etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/
> > Is there any reason why you didn't just extend the existing up/vpn-up,
> > down/vpn-down?
>
> This also leads to this error message from the dispatcher:
> Jun 17 17:03:13 pluto nm-dispatcher[14151]: Cannot execute
> '/etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/pre-down.d': not a regular file.
> Jun 17 17:03:13 pluto nm-dispatcher[14151]: Cannot execute
> '/etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/pre-up.d': not a regular file.

Thomas just pushed some fixes for this.

> While I'm not generally opposed to the idea of using .d directories, I
> think what's important is consistency. Either we use .d directories for
> all available actions, or we use a single directory and pass the action
> as $2.

Separate directories were used for pre-up/pre-down because these events
block state changes internally.  NM will not advance a device from
ACTIVATED -> DISCONNECTED (pre-down) or IP_CHECK -> SECONDARIES (pre-up)
until all the scripts execute.

Unfortunately, many scripts don't bother checking the action and just
run stuff, and the goal was to ensure that couldn't adversely impact the
user experience on upgrade.

I suppose it could also be done by putting some magic into the script
headers, but then again not all dispatcher scripts are shell...

Dan