On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 04:18 +0000, Mathieu Trudel wrote:
> Brian,
Hi,
> Ubuntu and Canonical didn't exactly make the decisions regarding how
> NetworkManager was to handle interfacing with dhclient: upstream, so the
> NetworkManager developers themselves did.
Fair enough. But as an integrator and the party who is "upstream" from
your users, IMHO, you should be advocating for them.
> For various reasons this may
> have caused dhclient's scripts to no longer be run in Ubuntu, and the
> exit hooks to still work in other distributions, but blaming people (at
> Canonical, or upstream) for this is certainly not the constructive way
> to correct the situation :)
Well, except that the (Ubuntu) bug has been open for a long time and
nothing has been done about it.
> Has this been brought up upstream yet?
I would have hoped that in your position as advocating for your users,
you would have opened one. I don't see anything open so I opened bug
615073 at bugzilla.gnome.org.
> Also, as the suggested changes
> (attached script and blog post)
Which attached script. There are a few.
> seem safe, it could be feasible to
> implement them, but it probably needs a little more checking first.
It would be nice to see this implemented, yes.
Sadly this bug has sat around, idle, for long enough that it will
probably not make Lucid. :-(
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 04:18 +0000, Mathieu Trudel wrote:
> Brian,
Hi,
> Ubuntu and Canonical didn't exactly make the decisions regarding how
> NetworkManager was to handle interfacing with dhclient: upstream, so the
> NetworkManager developers themselves did.
Fair enough. But as an integrator and the party who is "upstream" from
your users, IMHO, you should be advocating for them.
> For various reasons this may
> have caused dhclient's scripts to no longer be run in Ubuntu, and the
> exit hooks to still work in other distributions, but blaming people (at
> Canonical, or upstream) for this is certainly not the constructive way
> to correct the situation :)
Well, except that the (Ubuntu) bug has been open for a long time and
nothing has been done about it.
> Has this been brought up upstream yet?
I would have hoped that in your position as advocating for your users,
you would have opened one. I don't see anything open so I opened bug
615073 at bugzilla.gnome.org.
> Also, as the suggested changes
> (attached script and blog post)
Which attached script. There are a few.
> seem safe, it could be feasible to
> implement them, but it probably needs a little more checking first.
It would be nice to see this implemented, yes.
Sadly this bug has sat around, idle, for long enough that it will
probably not make Lucid. :-(