On Fri, 2018-10-26 at 12:01 +0200, Thomas HUMMEL wrote: > On 10/26/2018 10:05 AM, Thomas Haller wrote: > >
> > Ah, there is also `nmcli -f GENERAL.NM-MANAGED device show eth0 `, > > but > > this just returns (state != "unmanaged"). > > Wait : what's the diffence (if any) between GENERAL.NM-MANAGED == no > and > GENERAL.STATE == 10 (unmanaged) ? There is none: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager/tree/src/devices/nm-device.c?id=085b769729e9c623cc60bb0f88df36d1843cd22b#n16346 > > > > Optimally, there would be a nother flag which is the opposite of > > `nmcli > > device set $DEV managed $VALUE`. So, when you issue device-set, it > > would succeed and would toggle this flag, but that alone may not be > > sufficient to make the device (fully) GENERAL.NM-MANAGED yet. > > I don't see what you mean here by "the opposite" : maybe just a flag > to > reflect the request (and its ack) of the desire to manage the device > ? I mean, a flag (in NetworkManager public API) that exposes the user's intent of managing the device. That is, what `nmcli device set $DEV managed yes` sets. ... which may be slighly different than whether the device is actually "state != unmanaged". > > > > > > # nmcli device set eth1 managed yes > > > # echo $? > > > 0 > > > # nmcli -f GENERAL.DEVICE,GENERAL.STATE device show > > > GENERAL.DEVICE: eth1 > > > GENERAL.STATE: 20 (unavailable) > > > > state "unavailable", looks like the device has no cable plugged in > > (no > > carrier). You'd also see that with `ip link show eth1` saying "NO- > > CARRIER". > > Well, it's a VMWare virtual interface but 'connected' in VMWare and > iproute shows : > > 3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN mode > DEFAULT group default qlen 1000 > link/ether 00:50:56:8a:42:bf brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > > It seems normal to me the device is down since no one as configured > it. > But it seems I'm in a different case than no carrier'... > Maybe I'm supposed to see a LOWER_DOWN ? > > > Activation of the created profile then probably fails, because the > > device has no carrier (which is required for successful DHCP). > > Obviously the reason here is that the device is still unavailable > but > the question is why ? ;-) hm, good question. I don't know, I would need to see the level=TRACE syslog (journal) of NM. Btw, for hints for getting the logfile see https://cgit.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager/tree/contrib/fedora/rpm/NetworkManager.conf Generally, there are the device states "unmanaged" -> "unavailable" -> and "disconnected". For ethernet devices, a device is usually "unavailable" because it has no carrier. best, Thomas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ networkmanager-list mailing list networkmanager-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
