[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Yes, unfortunately resolvconf 1.63 depends on a newer version of initscripts: $sudo dpkg -i resolvconf_1.63ubuntu11_all.deb dpkg: regarding resolvconf_1.63ubuntu11_all.deb containing resolvconf, pre-dependency problem: resolvconf pre-depends on initscripts (= 2.88dsf-13.10) initscripts is installed, but is version 2.87dsf-4ubuntu17.5. dpkg: error processing resolvconf_1.63ubuntu11_all.deb (--install): pre-dependency problem - not installing resolvconf Errors were encountered while processing: resolvconf_1.63ubuntu11_all.deb -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Is there any chance of a backport for 10.04? I am working on a headless machine that should automatically connect to a server on the first available network interface. Resolvconf seems like the right tool for the job but as mentioned here it is broken for anything but 12.04. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Have you tried upgrading the resolvconf package to the Precise or Quantal version? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
my /etc/resolv.conf file got blown away [...] But guess what, no more clean reboots. Each reboot requires an ifdown/ifup ritual. As Steve mentioned, the resolvconf package was not an official part of Ubuntu prior to 12.04. In earlier releases it was available from the Universe repository but was broken such that after boot it was necessary to ifdown and ifup, just as you say. To fix this now you can choose either to remove the resolvconf package or update to the version (1.63ubuntu8) from the Precise repository. Resolvconf has been available in Debian for about eight years now and has thousands of users. Once in a while the Debian maintainers receive complaints like yours, but these unhappy experiences have always proved to have been a result of misunderstanding about how resolvconf is supposed to work. The resolvconf package collects nameserver information and keeps a file, /run/resolvconf/resolv.conf, up to date; /etc/resolv.conf is linked to /run/resolvconf/resolv.conf. If you don't want this feature then, in a terminal, as root, do dpkg --purge resolvconf and edit /etc/resolv.conf. (It may have occurred in the past that another package pulled in resolvconf via a Recommends dependency. We apologize for that, combined with the fact that the Ubuntu resolvconf package was not properly maintained.) I think it would be better, however, if you learned a bit more about resolvconf --- especially since Ubuntu 12.04's ubuntu-minimal will depend on it: please read /usr/share/doc/resolvconf/README.gz. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
I had an up-to-date Ubuntu 11.10 workstation. I recently received an update that required a 'restart' (aka reboot - new kernel). I put off the reboot while working away - for a week or so. So, as has happened each time I've had to 'restart' (aka reboot for a new kernel), I once again watched in disgust as my /etc/resolv.conf file got blown away. Really? Again? Is anyone EVER going to allow an Ubuntu system administrator to configure their networking set up via some /etc file contents. Is some GUI now mandatory? No, I don't use NetworkManager. It isn't installed. It created INCREDIBLE grief. As others have noted, I now find that ifdown/ifup works - albeit only once I conform to the Ubuntu way and put a dns-nameservers directive into the eth0 stanza in /etc/network/interfaces. But guess what, no more clean reboots. Each reboot requires an ifdown/ifup ritual. Really? The rationale for not only ignoring, but obliterating, a user defined system configuration must be fascinating. I just cannot imagine. And to think ... some wonder why the year of the Linux desktop never arrived! Disgusted and dismayed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 09:26:17PM -, Steffen H. wrote: I had an up-to-date Ubuntu 11.10 workstation. I recently received an update that required a 'restart' (aka reboot - new kernel). I put off the reboot while working away - for a week or so. So, as has happened each time I've had to 'restart' (aka reboot for a new kernel), I once again watched in disgust as my /etc/resolv.conf file got blown away. The Ubuntu bug tracker is a place for users to report bugs and work with developers to resolve them. You have followed up to an existing bug report without subscribing to it, providing only a vague description of the problem (something overwrote /etc/resolv.conf) and giving no reason to think your message is related to this closed bug report. You should not expect the Ubuntu developers to take any action in response to such a message. Is anyone EVER going to allow an Ubuntu system administrator to configure their networking set up via some /etc file contents. Is some GUI now mandatory? This has worked flawlessly for the vast majority of Ubuntu users since Ubuntu's inception. As others have noted, I now find that ifdown/ifup works - albeit only once I conform to the Ubuntu way and put a dns-nameservers directive into the eth0 stanza in /etc/network/interfaces. This sounds like you did have resolvconf installed. Resolvconf has never been part of a standard Ubuntu install prior to 12.04, was unmaintained in the Ubuntu archive and was in a known-broken state (as this and other bug reports attest). The obvious solution if you aren't happy with the output of resolvconf, a package which exists for the *sole purpose* of updating /etc/resolv.conf, is to uninstall the package. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
This bug was fixed in the package resolvconf - 1.63ubuntu1
---
resolvconf (1.63ubuntu1) precise; urgency=low
[ Thomas Hood ]
* Debian fixed bugs (LP: #797339, #871058, #471975, #378844, #894417)
* Differences from Debian:
- /sbin/resolvconf:
+ Exit if /etc/resolv.conf is not a symlink
- debian/rules:
+ Install upstart script rather than initscript (LP: #366967, #750423)
- debian/{pre,post}inst
+ Migrate (to /run) from /var/run, not from /lib/init/rw.
+ [0706f28] Remove old Sys V init scripts and symlinks
* Thanks to Sander van Grieken for his assistance with this release.
resolvconf (1.63) unstable; urgency=low
[ Thomas Hood ]
* [a83fce3] Depend on a later version of the initscripts package
* [cfc8349] Use variable instead of hard-coded path for old run dir
in maintainer scripts, to help shrink the Ubuntu diff.
* [9921902] Update and improve resolvconf(8)
* [719dc9b] Run update on boot (Closes: #651801, #651827)
* [5fc985c] Don't trigger on reconfigure (Closes: #651803)
resolvconf (1.62) unstable; urgency=low
[ Thomas Hood ]
* [0352a85] postrm: On removal restore original resolv.conf if current
(dynamic) resolv.conf has no content. (Closes: #644956)
Thanks to Josep Lladonosa Capell.
* [7cdfa73] Move logic details from initscript to /sbin/resolvconf;
for this purpose add new options to /sbin/resolvconf:
--enable-updates, --disable-updates, --updates-are-enabled,
--create-runtime-directories.
* [7cdfa73] Eliminate -i option supplied to update scripts and
the code in /etc/resolvconf/update.d/libc that made use of this.
[ Marco Nenciarini ]
* [e175b76] Remove hardcoded path from resolvconf's invocation in
maintainer scripts. Thanks to lintian
resolvconf (1.61) unstable; urgency=low
* [cbb5105] list-records: Add comment re: extglob; speed up final loop
* [4492943] Eliminate bashisms from /sbin/resolvconf. (Other scripts in this
package still use bash, though, so this does not close wish #519364.)
Thanks to Stefan Monnier
* [63da54b] update.d/libc: Only run-parts update-libc.d/ if the latter exists.
(Closes: #642965)
resolvconf (1.60) unstable; urgency=low
[ Marco Nenciarini ]
* [c30024e] Switch vcs fields to git
* [4041409] Add debian/gbp.conf to make easy the usage of
git-buildpackage
[ Thomas Hood ]
* [18e2fac] Update es.po thanks to Javier Fernández-Sanguino
(Closes: #642360)
* [18e2fac] Include resolv.conf.d/base information in
resolv.conf *after* dynamic information, rather than before
(Closes: #64)
resolvconf (1.59) unstable; urgency=low
* dhclient-enter-hooks.d/resolvconf: Add support for dhclient
DHCPv6 (Closes: #635470)
* postinst: Fail with message if /etc/resolv.conf is immutable
(Closes: #635775)
* Mention in resolvconf(8) that /etc/default/resolvconf has
to be created if it is to be used to set resolvconf environment
variables (Closes: #633014)
* Drop outdated id.po
resolvconf (1.58) unstable; urgency=low
[ Thomas Hood ]
* Update README
* Update debconf template translations:
* da.po thanks to Joe Dalton (Closes: #630241)
* cs.po thanks to Miroslav Kure (Closes: #630669)
* nl.po thanks to Jeroen Schot (Closes: #631499)
* pt.po thanks to Pedro Ribeiro (Closes: #631569)
[ Marco Nenciarini ]
* Update italian debconf translation
* debian/rules: Add build-arch and build-indep target, as required
by policy.
resolvconf (1.57) unstable; urgency=low
[ Marco Nenciarini ]
* Update debconf template translations:
* fr.po thanks to Christian Perrier (Closes: #629560)
* Fix typo in prerm script
resolvconf (1.56) unstable; urgency=low
[ Thomas Hood ]
* Create /etc/resolvconf/run as a directory if no tmpfs is
available into which it can symlink. (Closes: #629186)
* Eliminate warning brought to light by piuparts:
* Grep /etc/network/interfaces only if it exists
* Run dpkg-trigger with --no-await
* Update README
* Update debconf template translations:
* sv.po thanks to Martin Bagge (Closes: #629022)
* ru.po thanks to Yuri Kozlov (Closes: #629165)
* de.po thanks to Helge Kreutzmann (Closes: #629201)
* eu.po thanks to Iñaki Larrañaga Murgoitio (Closes: #629411)
resolvconf (1.55) unstable; urgency=medium
[ Thomas Hood ]
* Include old update.d/bind script for illustration purposes
as /usr/share/doc/resolvconf/resolvconf-update-bind.
* Use /usr/lib/resolvconf/dpkg-event.d instead of a /etc/...
path for dpkg event hook scripts. The scripts don't need
to be configuration files.
* In postrm print a message and put up debconf note recommending
reboot. (Closes: #628524)
* Remove comments from /etc/resolv.conf on removal.
* Remove /lib/init/rw/resolvconf on purge. (Closes: #628669)
* Update debconf template translation:
* eu.po thanks to Iñaki Larrañaga Murgoitio (Closes: #628719)
* Clean up many .po headers
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
resolvconf v1.63ppa7 from the jdthood's PPA also fixes the boot up problem on my oneiric machine (using a local caching DNS server as well as multiple upstream DNSes for VPN connections) . Thanks! -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Well, if there was a dns-search option in a stanza that was activated then the corresponding search option should have appeared in resolv.conf. If that didn't happen then we need to figure out why it did not. Please let me know if, after fixing /etc/network/interfaces, resolv.conf still isn't correctly generated on that one machine. No, resolvconf has no debugging or logging features. Cheers, -- Thomas -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
That was the thing - it had dns-search but not dns-nameservers. The dns-search line showed up fine. I don't think that's resolvconf's fault. After fixing /etc/network/interfaces, I rebooted the machine twice - the first time, I zero'ed the resolv.conf file (not deleting the symlink of course) and the resolv.conf regenerated as I expected. I rebooted again and the resolv.conf generated fine, so I'm good. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Thanks very much for testing the beta resolvconf package. I am pleased to hear that it behaves better than the previous Ubuntu resolvconf package. We'll do our best to release 1.63ubuntu1 very soon. Around the time you were writing your message I uploaded a new version, 1.63ppa6. Relative to 1.63ppa5 which you tested, this new version makes a change to the resolvconf upstart configuration such that an update is done at boot time. Previous 1.63 versions omitted to do this. (The update is necessary, otherwise machines with only static nameserver information (in files in /etc/resolvconf/resolv.conf.d/) end up with an absent resolv.conf file.) I would appreciate if you would update to 1.63ppa6 and let me know whether or not everything still works as it should on your systems. -- Thomas Hood -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
I will test the new version today and post the results tonight. Look for another post from me in about 10 hours. Thanks, Marty -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
One of my systems (an Oneiric server) did not correctly regenerate resolv.conf on boot - but it had a partial interfaces file (dns-search was defined but not dns-nameservers. Don't ask me how that happened.) I'm not exactly sure what to make of that, as I have several other boxes (Oneiric and Precise) that worked just fine. I have been having some problems with the network interfaces on them (they are bnx2-based cards). I'll keep an eye on things and see if I can reboot that particular one again. Are there any diagnostic levels I can turn up in resolvconf to assist, if needed? Thanks, Marty -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
I have installed the new packages on several oneiric and precise boxes that used to have problems with resolvconf 1.48 from Ubuntu; the 1.63ppa5 packages seem to resolve those issues. The servers are multi- interface machines, one workstation uses static addressing but never seemed to be able to populate its resolv.conf at boot time. (I had done the /etc/init.d/networking restart workaround). I installed the new packages on all of them today and they all populated resolv.conf correctly at boot time without requiring the networking restart. Thanks for working this out - this bug has been at least a minor headache for me since intrepid, I believe. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed = Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
A new Ubuntu resolvconf package has been prepared by the Debian maintainers which we hope will fix this bug. I ask you to test this new package before we upload it to the Ubuntu repos. Please install the resolvconf package from ppa:jdthood/resolvconf (https://launchpad.net/~jdthood/+archive/resolvconf) and let me know whether or not you have any problems with it. -- Thomas Hood Debian resolvconf maintainers resolvconf-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Hello Mathieu, Sander is now working with the Debian maintainers of resolvconf to fix the problems in the Ubuntu version of the resolvconf package. Your participation would also be most welcome! Sander mentioned some improvements to resolvconf itself that can be beneficial to Debian as well above. Some of these have now been implemented in the Debian package and will be present in upcoming release 1.62. With these improvements in place it will be easier to adapt the package to Ubuntu. You can follow our progress at http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/resolvconf-devel -- Thomas Hood Debian resolvconf maintainers -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Sander, Could you please copy the exact changes you're referring to back in this bug (since bug 448095 is marked as a duplicate of this one here)? It would also make it a little easier to track down and sponsor. Any type of patch will do, if you have just an upstart script that's fine, and if you have a debdiff that's even better, but we can work basing on what's already available. Once you have a patch or something added, let me know and we can complete the work (and forward any relevant changes to Debian). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
upstart configuration is already done. Also packaging and patches are available See Bug #448095 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
That would be much appreciated. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
More generally (and this is addressed to anyone who has submitted information to this report and to all those marked as duplicates of this one) I would appreciate it if one or more of you would step forward and offer to help me maintain the resolvconf package in Ubuntu on an ongoing basis. I would be happy to do this work myself but I am just too unfamiliar with the Ubuntu upstart architecture and with Ubuntu development processes. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
I'm willing to do that. I have done the upstart specifics of resolvconf over at bug #448095, and have made some improvements to resolvconf itself that can be beneficial to debian as well (basically factoring out hardcoded paths in /etc/resolvconf/*.d scripts and delegating those to the /sbin/resolvconf script, as well as consolidating initialisation into /sbin/resolvconf). It's all there at bug #448095, and I;m willing to discuss those changes with you to see how we can make it more robust on both Ubuntu and Debian. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Ran into this when updating to 11.10, I suspect that an incomplete transition from /var/run to /run lead to it. Anyway, purging the package was the cleanest fix. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
I am the author and maintainer of resolvconf in Debian. Unfortunately I don't know enough about upstart to maintain resolvconf for Ubuntu. In its current condition in Ubuntu (universe) the resolvconf package does not work properly. If no one is willing to maintain resolvconf in Ubuntu then it should be removed. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
It turns out that writing Upstart configuration is pretty simple, so I'll take a crack at making some Ubuntu patches in the next few weeks. Someone remind me if I forget. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
To disable automatic generation of /etc/resolv.conf, purge the resolvconf package. Then you should have a static /etc/resolv.conf you can edit by hand. Unless you use NetworkManager in which case NetworkManager will overwrite /etc/resolv.conf. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
The workaround in dupe bug #448095 might still work.. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
#448095 has over 80 comments -- I've read through it carefully several times and I don't see that there's a clear, works-on-Lucid work around. But that's ok -- jdthood's suggest above in comment 15 sounds like the straightforward work around I was seeking. (Since I don't need the dynamic feature of a changing resolv.conf file.) I will try it, and will report back here. Thanks Thomas and Sander for your ideas! -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
You could also try the PPA mentioned in comment 39 (has lucid packages), then read comment 83. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
...just removing (apt-get purge resolvconf) the package fixes the problem for me. I don't need the /etc/resolv.conf file being dynamically modified. Simply purge the package, remove the # this file is auto generated... comment in /etc/resolv.conf and my problem is solved. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
...I'd be perfectly satisfied with a work-around. As it is, I've waded through all the comments on this bug and all the dupes and there's just a mess of try-this-try-that, etc. I suspect, I might be able to remove the dns- options from my interfaces file, and then somehow disable/break the auto generation of the /etc/resolv.conf file and then I could just manually set its contents. But I just haven't yet had the time to go mucking around. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Is there really no solution to this, in an LTS distro? Seriously? Keep in mind that resolvconf is from universe. But still, if resolvconf is going to be offered for Ubuntu then critical bugs in the Ubuntu patch need to be fixed. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
I have some 10.04 LTS systems which are afflicted by this, and some which aren't. Is there really no solution to this, in an LTS distro? Seriously? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu) Status: New = Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 Title: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resolvconf/+bug/366967/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
This looks like an issue with resolvconf not being integrated with the Ubuntu event-driven boot, not with ifupdown not integrating properly with udev. Indeed, ifupdown now hooks into upstart instead of into udev, but I don't imagine this has fixed your problem. ** Package changed: ifupdown (Ubuntu) = resolvconf (Ubuntu) ** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete = New -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Don't know why the requirements are conflicting. I am sure no one would object that resolvconf runtime initialization should happen before first ifup run. Just that simple. As to iptables rules loading, I usually put iptables-restore command into 'iface lo' config section. Earlier, Debian had a kind of infrastructure for iptables rules loading/saving, but they deprecated it once with a new iptables version, and now we have to invent our own. -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
For the original problem, why not remove eth0 from auto in /etc/network/interfaces, and call ifup eth0 from rc.local? It appears to me that there are conflicting requirements when interfaces should be configured. I like to have the iptable rules in place before bringing up the outer interface. -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
This bug is specific to Ubuntu 9.04. For Ubuntu 9.10, see LP:448095 (in the file '/etc/init/network-interface.conf' comment out the line 'exec ifup --allow auto $INTERFACE') -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
My symptoms are the same on ubuntu 9.10 karmic. I use a static ip address, but I decided to migrate from specifying my dns servers in /etc/resolv.conf to adding a dns-nameservers line in /etc/network/interfaces. After a full boot /etc/resolv.conf is blank with only the comment lines. # Dynamic resolv.conf(5) file for glibc resolver(3) generated by resolvconf(8) # DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE BY HAND -- YOUR CHANGES WILL BE OVERWRITTEN After I manually restart the network with ifdown/ifup, then my resolv.conf gets properly written. This my /etc/network/interfaces: auto lo iface lo inet loopback iface eth1 inet static address 192.168.1.11 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.1.1 dns-nameservers 68.94.157.1 68.94.156.1 auto eth1 -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu) Assignee: Scott James Remnant (scott) = (unassigned) -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
I've looked at how Debian handles that - and it also launches ifup/down for new interfaces but with --allow hotplug. Sane approach. Please fix Ubuntu's behavior? -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Fact that ifup runs so early from this udev rule breaks asynchronous mounting of network shares (nfs/cifs). If you add a CIFS share to /etc/fstab, set it to auto, it might not get mounted at boot anyway. It should get mounted as a result of /etc/network/if-up.d/mountnfs script run, during ifup, but... ifup will get run by udev early, and this script will either fail, or won't run as a result of another script failing. Later, when /etc/init.d/networking calls ifup -a, ifup will see that interfaces are already up, and do nothing. As a result, share will remain unmounted. It will of course work if you run the /etc/init.d/networking script by hand (or just ifdown/up). And yet another workaround is to set ASYNCMOUNTNFS=no in /etc/default/rcS. But truth is, those are just workarounds, and the actual problem lies in 85-ifupdown.rules. What are the cases that it SHOULD and WILL run properly? How about changing that ifup call from --allow auto to --allow udev, and just make sure that interfaces that are safe for such early treatment are marked with such class in /etc/network/interfaces? -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 05:48 +, Wladimir Mutel wrote: Everything I have configured in my /etc/network/interfaces worked for some reason up to and including Ubuntu 8.10. I had a look into ifupdown-udev integration in Ubuntu 8.10 and so far did not notice any serious difference with 9.04, but anyway, with 9.04, actions configured in 'interfaces' started to be triggered too early (before the filesystem is remounted rw, before rundirs are cleaned, etc.). This has been the case for a while. It would help if you could identify what things run from ifup require a writable filesystem, in general those kinds of things shouldn't. Some samples for your consideration : auto lo eth0 iface lo inet loopback iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.200.240 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.200.0 broadcast 192.168.200.255 dns-nameservers 192.168.200.203 192.168.200.202 dns-search example.dp.ua up ip addr add 192.168.201.240/24 dev eth0 up sysctl -w net.ipv4.conf.eth0.log_martians=0 Worked in 7.*, 8.*. Stopped to work in 9.04. None of this requires a writable filesystem? Symptom : resolvconf-related information (dns-* options) is not recorded in resolvconf rundir (/lib/init/rw/resolvconf/interface/), and so resolv.conf is not regenerated with specified options. Possible cause : udev is run at S03, and resolvconf rundir is initialized and cleaned only at S07. There is an integration between ifupdown and resolvconf, and it is broken by this. This may be a bug in resolvconf in Ubuntu. Another symptom : bind9 configuration file in /var/run/bind/named.options is not regenerated, its 'forwarders' list is not updated, left empty. Possible cause : clobbered resolvconf rundir at S07, cleaning of /var/run at S36. There is an integration between bind9 and resolvconf, and it is broken by this. Likewise sounds like a resolveconf issue. Note that /var/run is not cleaned in Ubuntu since it's a tmpfs. iface lo inet loopback up iptables-restore /home/mwg/its iface eth0 inet static address 172.17.12.15 netmask 255.255.255.0 dns-nameservers 172.17.12.1 up ip rule add from 172.17.12.15 lookup 4 up ip route add default via 172.17.12.1 table 4 up ip route add 195.24.128.78 via 172.17.12.1 up ip route add 195.24.128.75 via 172.17.12.1 up ip route add 195.24.128.88 via 172.17.12.1 up echo pon dsl-provider1 | batch iface eth3 inet static address 192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 up echo pon dsl-provider2 | batch Symptom : submitting batch job fails, and bringing up the interface fails as a result. At S40, 'ifup -a' is run again, trying to bring up the same interface, and this time failing at 'ip route add' as the route has already been added. IP rule (routing policy) is added twice. Possible cause : 'batch' calls 'at -qb' which requires /var/spool/cron/atjobs/ to be accessible r/w. I have my /var in the root filesystem so it becomes remounted r/w only at S10, while udev runs ifup shortly after S03 and probably well before S10. Workaround : comment out the same line in the same .rules file. That makes sense. I don't have an idea why these samples worked for me completely well in 8.10 and before. May be udev has become faster in 9.04, and race conditions started to happen. May be some barrier had been removed which prevented ifup from running too early. Anyway, I hope you will be able to test my samples with 8.10 and 9.04 and reproduce the behaviour I observed. udev is certainly much faster in 9.04, and it's very possible that this means the race is being lost. A lot of this integration work dates back to when we still used ifup on the desktop configuration, and had issues with blocking on DHCP and suchlike. Since the desktop now uses Network Manager, a lot of this isn't really necessary (though we still need to ifup lo, etc.) May be ifup should be taught that complex interface configs are not to be processed from under udev and fail immediately in this case. Like, if the interface config contains options related to resolvconf, wpa-supplicant, or any commands in 'up' options. Or may be, big red warning should be included in 'man 5 interfaces' that the user should not expect the filesystem to be mounted r/w during interface bring-up, which will certainly teach the user about certain limitations of right things to do at this moment. I tend to think we should try and fix things to make them right, rather than tell users what they can't do. The idea of detecting a complex interface configuration is quite compelling, deferring the ifup until after the root filesystem is writable in those cases. We wouldn't want to do this for the simple cases since you might rely on the network to be able to bring up the root filesystem (NFS). Scott -- Scott
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Writable filesystem in my cases is required only by at/batch, as we have determined. But who knows what configurations could other people have. Certainly, if the interface config has 'up' options with any commands, this should be an indication that it is not to be brought up from udev. Or may be provide an option for the interface config, named like 'noudev', to prevent this explicitly by hand. Potential resolvconf bug is dependent on these integration chains : chain1 : udev is started at S03, udev runs ifupdown, ifupdown runs resolvconf for dns-* options, resolvconf expects its rundir to be initialized (rm everything, mkdir interface, etc) chain2 : resolvconf rundir is initialized only at S07 . So earlier runs of resolvconf fail due to missing interface dir So, resolvconf rundir initialization should happen before its first run, i.e. before starting udev to be sure. Btw, there is nice bug 340071, just about the opposite matter. It seems the proper order of resolvconf initialization still has to be determined. re: /var/run, I was really wrong and now I have checked by myself that tmpfs /var/run is not cleaned really, so that's not a question now. Network Manager is useful on the desktop, but I have a number of GUI- less servers and routers migrated from Debian to Ubuntu, with advanced enough configuration in interfaces(5) for proper operation of ifupdown and all its integration chains to really matter for me. I don't use NFS much enough, saving aside for diskless booting, so I could not say anything significant on this topic. Hope, ifupdown or resolvconf could be reformed to satisfy user's needs in both ways. -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Ubuntu has called ifup from a udev rule for pretty much every release, I'm not sure what changed between Ubuntu 8.10 and 9.04 that has caused your problem. From the simplest perspective, yes, you have a very complex setup and it's likely not possible to run certain things before the filesystem is writable -- however the things you are doing should not rely on that. As to the difference between /etc/network and /var/run/network - this is an Ubuntu/Debian difference. It sounds like some scripts are using the Debian /etc path, and need to be updated to use the Ubuntu path. All-in-all you are experiencing a number of problems, and it would greatly help if you could explain in detail everything you have experienced. We can then get them filed as *separate* bugs that can be addressed. Thanks ** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided = Medium ** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu) Status: New = Incomplete ** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu) Assignee: (unassigned) = Scott James Remnant (scott) -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 366967] Re: ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly
Everything I have configured in my /etc/network/interfaces worked for some reason up to and including Ubuntu 8.10. I had a look into ifupdown-udev integration in Ubuntu 8.10 and so far did not notice any serious difference with 9.04, but anyway, with 9.04, actions configured in 'interfaces' started to be triggered too early (before the filesystem is remounted rw, before rundirs are cleaned, etc.). Some samples for your consideration : auto lo eth0 iface lo inet loopback iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.200.240 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.200.0 broadcast 192.168.200.255 dns-nameservers 192.168.200.203 192.168.200.202 dns-search example.dp.ua up ip addr add 192.168.201.240/24 dev eth0 up sysctl -w net.ipv4.conf.eth0.log_martians=0 Worked in 7.*, 8.*. Stopped to work in 9.04. Symptom : resolvconf-related information (dns-* options) is not recorded in resolvconf rundir (/lib/init/rw/resolvconf/interface/), and so resolv.conf is not regenerated with specified options. Possible cause : udev is run at S03, and resolvconf rundir is initialized and cleaned only at S07. There is an integration between ifupdown and resolvconf, and it is broken by this. Another symptom : bind9 configuration file in /var/run/bind/named.options is not regenerated, its 'forwarders' list is not updated, left empty. Possible cause : clobbered resolvconf rundir at S07, cleaning of /var/run at S36. There is an integration between bind9 and resolvconf, and it is broken by this. Workaround : comment out /ACTION.*add.*RUN.*ifup/ line in /lib/udev/rules.d/85-ifupdown.rules Sample 2 : auto lo eth0 eth3 iface lo inet loopback up iptables-restore /home/mwg/its iface eth0 inet static address 172.17.12.15 netmask 255.255.255.0 dns-nameservers 172.17.12.1 up ip rule add from 172.17.12.15 lookup 4 up ip route add default via 172.17.12.1 table 4 up ip route add 195.24.128.78 via 172.17.12.1 up ip route add 195.24.128.75 via 172.17.12.1 up ip route add 195.24.128.88 via 172.17.12.1 up echo pon dsl-provider1 | batch iface eth3 inet static address 192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 up echo pon dsl-provider2 | batch Symptom : submitting batch job fails, and bringing up the interface fails as a result. At S40, 'ifup -a' is run again, trying to bring up the same interface, and this time failing at 'ip route add' as the route has already been added. IP rule (routing policy) is added twice. Possible cause : 'batch' calls 'at -qb' which requires /var/spool/cron/atjobs/ to be accessible r/w. I have my /var in the root filesystem so it becomes remounted r/w only at S10, while udev runs ifup shortly after S03 and probably well before S10. Workaround : comment out the same line in the same .rules file. I don't have an idea why these samples worked for me completely well in 8.10 and before. May be udev has become faster in 9.04, and race conditions started to happen. May be some barrier had been removed which prevented ifup from running too early. Anyway, I hope you will be able to test my samples with 8.10 and 9.04 and reproduce the behaviour I observed. May be ifup should be taught that complex interface configs are not to be processed from under udev and fail immediately in this case. Like, if the interface config contains options related to resolvconf, wpa-supplicant, or any commands in 'up' options. Or may be, big red warning should be included in 'man 5 interfaces' that the user should not expect the filesystem to be mounted r/w during interface bring-up, which will certainly teach the user about certain limitations of right things to do at this moment. So far, the best workaround for me has been the one I mention above. -- ifupdown-udev integration should be thought-out more thoroghly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366967 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
