Comment 19 for bug 336736

Alexander,

I appreciate your trying to help, but I am just not that interested in
pursuing this. I had a need to make some changes for a VPN at school
(routing etc...) prior to the network coming up; pre-up has been disabled
for whatever reason, so I found a one-off workaround to use.

It's a hassle to maintain however, so I have simply abandoned using the VPN
- it's simply not worth it for the single service I needed it for, I can do
without.

I had thought the lack of "pre-up" was a simple oversight that would be
quickly fixed once noticed (which is why I opened the bug). I am frankly
astonished, however, that it was simply dropped with no good reason and no
mention in the docs/change files.

I don't know who "upstream" is (I know what the word means - but I
personally do not know who it refers to in this context) so I cannot fathom
their reasoning for abandoning it. It seems like an arbitrary, or at worst,
biased decision to get rid of a perfectly good, working and elegant system
that many people were using.

I'd be interested in hearing what reasons "upstream" has for getting rid of
pre-up, but I am frankly not hopeful that said reasons will be forthcoming.
I am not interested in helping to create a bunch of one-off, special case
hacks to replace a perfectly good system that was axed due to a dumb
decision.

It's sad to see such lock-down approaches being taken in a Linux distro. I
had always believed that Linux was a free and open system, in the truest
senses of the words, where users were allowed to do whatever they choose
with the system. It seems to me a restrictive step back to take something
that was once easy to do and deliberately make it harder.

You can count me out of this process.

Thanks for the attempt.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Alexander Sack <email address hidden> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 02:25:27PM -0000, JoeDuncan wrote:
> > Marlon, you can manually edit the /etc/init.d/networking script to call
> > whatever commands you like before bringing up the network interfaces.
> >
> > Ugly and inelegant I know, but if the powers that be have decided for
> > whatever reason to nuke the nice way of doing it, it's all we're left
> with.
>
> I offered to look into special case solutions for most important use
> cases. Thats not enough? Or just too much thought?
>
> - Alexander
>
> --
> NetworkManager does not call /etc/network/if-pre-up.d scripts
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/336736
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>
> Status in “network-manager” package in Ubuntu: Won't Fix
>
> Bug description:
> Binary package hint: network-manager
>
> Ubuntu 8.10, Linux 2.6.27-12-generic #1 SMP Thu Feb 5 09:26:35 UTC 2009
> i686 GNU/Linux
> NetworkManager 0.7~~svn20081018t105859-0ubuntu1.8.10.1
>
> I've been trying to get a script to trigger on the "pre-up" phase of
> network configuration, however, NetworkManager doesn't seem to call it's
> dispatcher for "pre-up" or "post-down" events.
>
> None of the scripts I put in /etc/network/if-pre-up.d ever got called, so I
> added the following line to the top of the dispatcher script
> "/etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/01ifupdown":
>
> logger -t $0 "called with $1 $2"
>
> Where $0 is the name of the script, $1 is the network interface and $2 is
> the network event.
>
> After bringing some network connections up and down, I checked the logs,
> and NetworkManager doesn't seem to be calling
> "/etc/NetworkManager/dispatch.d/01ifupdown" for either "pre-up" or
> "post-down" events. The only entries that show up are for "up" and "down"
> events.
>
> According to the changelog both "pre-up" and "post-down" events are
> supposed to be supported as of version 0.5.1-0ubuntu12:
>
> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager
>

--
Joe Duncan
PhD Program, Psychology
Queen's University
<email address hidden>
(647)216-9135