On Sun 04 Feb 2024 at 13:57:13 (+0900), Byunghee HWANG (황병희) wrote: > On Fri, 2024-02-02 at 10:41 -0600, David Wright wrote: > > On Fri 02 Feb 2024 at 07:37:34 (+0000), Tixy wrote: > > > On Wed, 2024-01-31 at 22:12 -0600, David Wright wrote: > > > > On Tue 30 Jan 2024 at 07:05:55 (+0000), Tixy wrote: > > > > > I also have a more vague memory that you could put config into > > > > > /etc/network/interfaces then in some circumstance NetworkManager would > > > > > not try and manage that interface, and in others it would take over. > > > > > (Perhaps selected by allow hotplug option in the ifupdown config?) > > > > > > > > That seems unlikely. Perhaps you're thinking of NM's ifupdown plugin > > > > that allows you to use the configuration in /e/n/i. I'm assuming the > > > > OP has not installed that in their sleep. > > > > > > They wouldn't need to because it looks like it's shipped with the main > > > network-manage package which contains various files with 'plugin' in > > > their name, including libnm-settings-plugin-ifupdown.so. > > > > What I said was unlikely is that an option in ifupdown's configuration, > > /e/n/i, would control NM's behaviour. It's the mere mention of the > > interface there, as in iface enp5s0 inet dhcp that makes ifupdown > > control it, and makes NM back off, AIUI. > > > > > As we've seen from the OPs latest reply, the plugin is configured to > > > not manage interfaces. > > > > Right, and so the default NM configuration (ifupdown plugin present, > > news to me) and [ifupdown] // managed=false in the .conf file, > > means that NM should not, by default, configure any interface > > mentioned in /e/n/i. In the OP's case, the original /e/n/i: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 433 Oct 4 17:23 interfaces.orig > > is big enough to hold a typical lo+eth+wlan configuration, which > > we haven't seen yet. > > Sorry for late, David!
That's the beauty of mailing lists: it just doesn't matter. > root@thinkpad-e495:/etc/network# cat interfaces.orig > # This file describes the network interfaces available on your system > # and how to activate them. For more information, see interfaces(5). > > source /etc/network/interfaces.d/* > > # The loopback network interface > auto lo > iface lo inet loopback > > # The primary network interface > allow-hotplug wlp4s0 > iface wlp4s0 inet dhcp > # wireless-* options are implemented by the wireless-tools > package > wireless-mode managed > wireless-essid V30_3982 > root@thinkpad-e495:/etc/network# date So it would appear that your question is exactly as in the reference you quoted, that ifupdown was configuring wlp4s0 when /w/n/i was in place, resulting in NM displaying a question mark. Now you've removed it, NM has taken over. That's just as in the first answer (Stephen Kitt Jul 23, 2018 7:00), except for the minor detail that Kitt mentions one should down the interface before moving /e/n/i if one wants to make the change cleanly, without rebooting. (Frequently, people forget that /e/n/i is reread by ifupdown whenever you run its binaries; that's different from how many other programs treat their configuration files.) > 1. I have never touched the inside of that file. > 2. I guess the real original file was from Debian 12. Not knowing the history of your installation, I wouldn't like to guess exactly how NM and ifupdown arrived at your earlier situation. But to answer the question posed in your OP, there's no bug here—just two wifi configuration methods being prioritised in accordance with their design. Cheers, David.
