Description of problem: The traditional way to provide information which cannot be provided by DHCP (specifically in my case additional DNS domain names in search path) has been by writing an /etc/dhclient-exit-hooks script which can be used to edit the /etc/resolv.conf file after it is created by DHCP. This script is no longer being run when NetworkManager creates resolv.conf Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): NetworkManager-0.7.0-0.9.3.svn3623.fc9.x86_64 How reproducible: Every time I boot. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Boot system, observe NetworkManager generated resolv.conf does not have the changed dhclient-exit-hooks would have made. Actual results: see above Expected results: augmented search path in resolv.conf Additional info: I'd be happy to learn the "new way" to achieve the same thing dhclient-exit-hooks did, but on the other hand, I'd really wonder why there would need to be a "new way" other than obsessive OCD on the part of developers. How hard is it to just run the dadgum script if it exists?
NetworkManager provides its own hooks into dhclient so that it can do its thing. You can get NetworkManager to call your script though. NetworkManager runs all scripts that are in /etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d. There should be at least one script in there to show you how things work.
Scripts in /etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/ do work, but they don't fully handle the sorts of things the dhclient-script and friends did. It's certainly less featureful. For example, when dhclient does a renew, NetworkManager does not run any script in /etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/. Those only seem to be run when NetworkManager changes state on a device using either "up" or "down". NetworkManager's actions after the renew causes some other services to have to rediscover the interface: Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop dhclient: DHCPREQUEST on wlan0 to 192.168.1.1 port 67 Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop dhclient: DHCPACK from 192.168.1.1 Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop dhclient: bound to 192.168.1.6 -- renewal in 42559 seconds. Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop NetworkManager: <info> DHCP: device wlan0 state changed bound -> renew Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop NetworkManager: <info> address 192.168.1.6 Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop NetworkManager: <info> netmask 255.255.255.0 Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop NetworkManager: <info> gateway 192.168.1.1 Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop NetworkManager: <info> nameserver '127.0.0.1' Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop avahi-daemon[2579]: Withdrawing address record for 192.168.1.6 on wlan0. Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop avahi-daemon[2579]: Leaving mDNS multicast group on interface wlan0.IPv4 with address 192.168.1.6. Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop avahi-daemon[2579]: Interface wlan0.IPv4 no longer relevant for mDNS. Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop avahi-daemon[2579]: Joining mDNS multicast group on interface wlan0.IPv4 with address 192.168.1.6. Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop avahi-daemon[2579]: New relevant interface wlan0.IPv4 for mDNS. Jul 10 01:48:22 laptop avahi-daemon[2579]: Registering new address record for 192.168.1.6 on wlan0.IPv4. Jul 10 01:48:23 laptop NetworkManager: <info> Policy set (wlan0) as default device for routing and DNS. I run openvpn as a service, outside of NetworkManager. Using the normal dhclient-script hooks, I can detect this action and restart the openvpn service when it happens. The /usr/libexec/nm-dhcp-client.action script NetworkManager runs from dhclient doesn't appear to be able to handle the same idea of hooks. Without a cronjob watching things, or modifying NetworkManager's init script to use the normal dhclient-script, I have to manually restart openvpn everytime DHCP renews. It tends to be less than transparent. Should this replacement for dhclient-script read and handle the same hooks files that dhclient-script itself uses, or should NetworkManager itself not make changes to an interface like this when a simple renew happens? Ideally, functionality replaced should not be a reduction. I'd like to see the hooks work.
Reporter, are you still running Fedora 9, or have you upgraded to Fedora 10 or Rawhide? In either case, can you let us know whether the issue is still happening, and give the current version of the kernel and NM packages you're using. Thank you. -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
This message is a reminder that Fedora 9 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 9. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '9'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 9's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 9 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Fedora 9 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-07-10. Fedora 9 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.
Nothing like stoopid automation.