CentOS - Jul 2012 - system-config-network-tui not part of base install... wtf

Who was the genius that decided that system-config-network-tui should
NOT be part of the base CentOS 6.3 install ??

Not to mention it has insane deps like wifi firmware packages... not
really if all you want to do is configure eth0 from the command
line...

FC

On 23/07/2012 04:40, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> Who was the genius that decided that system-config-network-tui should
> NOT be part of the base CentOS 6.3 install ??
>
> Not to mention it has insane deps like wifi firmware packages... not
> really if all you want to do is configure eth0 from the command
> line...
>
>
/sbin/ifconfig eth0 w.x.y.z netmask v.v.v.0
/sbin/route add default gw a.b.c.d
echo nameserver e.f.g.h > /etc/resolv.conf
echo nameserver i.j.k.l >> /etc/resolv.conf


-- 
Regards,

Giles Coochey, CCNA, CCNAS
NetSecSpec Ltd
+44 (0) 7983 877438
http://www.coochey.net
http://www.netsecspec.co.uk
giles at coochey.net

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net>
wrote:
> do not install servers if you are refuse to think
> really!
Why create GUI installers then?. Let's just package a tarball and let
users unpack it manually.

In fact, are you advocating for the removal of
system-config-network-tui ? how about removal of all non-modal text
editors like joe ? let's force everyone to "think" in
'vi'...

*sarcasm*
FC

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 10:55:07 AM Fernando Cassia
wrote:
> My point is simple: I install the base config. I'm in text mode. I
> need networking to work to install extra packages and begin setting up
> my system, users, permissions, packages, etc. I have no problem doing
> that manually AFTER I get the system up and running (and by
"running"
> I mean 'having network connectivity'). Having me edit config files
> manually is an *annoyance*.
The way it's supposed to be done is to set up networking during install. 
The GUI installer has a button, that is clearly labeled, during install.  You
set it up to connect automatically, and be active for all users, and it starts
even in text mode during boot up.

The text installer is effectively deprecated; if you want/need to do, say, a
serial console install you're supposed to do a VNC install and run the GUI
remotely over a VNC session (the serial console/text mode handler will do enough
network configuration to get the GUI installer running over VNC).

Barring that, if the 'Desktop' package set is installed (I last did this
with 6.1, so it may be different now) with certain server packages also
installed (no, I don't have a rigorous package set to quote, that's left
as an exercise for the reader as I'm not going to do your homework for you
on that one.....) the system will come up in runlevel 3, but will bring up a
text mode firstboot that includes a text mode network configurator.  While it
would be interesting to see the exact package set that triggers this, I have not
had the time nor the motivation to do that myself, just going by what happened
when I installed some boxes a while back.

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at
thelounge.net> wrote:
> BOAH do SIMPLY NOT make a base-install if it does not
> satisfy you? what is there so complicated?
The installer switched to base mode/text install due to 'low memory'.
I just used the default recommendation by Virtualbox for Linux-RedHat.

FC

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at
thelounge.net> wrote:
> there is nothing wrong in CentOS or Fedora
Of course, in the grand scheme of things, it's not a "problem". A
"problem" is a crashing kernel or buggy drivers.

My opinion after this experience is that it'd help for CentOS to
include system-config-network-tui as part of the base install. That is
my honest opinion about this experience. It'd have saved me from some
minor annoyance, albeit an annoyance nonetheless.

Just think the opposite: what would be the expense-damage of including
it as part of the base install?. Would it:

1. Break the OS
2. Make things easier for people who end up in the same situation I did.
3. Affect the balance of the Universe. ;)

Your choice. I think 2.

FC

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at
thelounge.net> wrote:
>
>> Yes, let's go back to the days of typing the boot code in hex to
get
>> the system started.   It's all optional
>
> jesus christ a basic network connection is configured
> within 30 seconds wich some
>
> echo "whatever" >> file
Umm, no.  It takes me longer than that to find the mac address on the
interface in question.
> if someone is too lazy/stupid to configure the network
> with a base-install why in the world does he do a base-install
> at all?
My machines usually have 6 interfaces or so, are set up in one
location, then moved to the production location with the final
configuration (including IP's) done by operators that are better at
windows than linux.  Sorry if that doesn't match your view of the way
the world should work.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:42:05 AM Fernando Cassia
wrote:
> My opinion after this experience is that it'd help for CentOS to
> include system-config-network-tui as part of the base install.
The question becomes "Does upstream include it in their upstream EL?" 
If the answer is yes, it will be included.  If the answer is no, it will not be
included, as a rule of thumb.
> Just think the opposite: what would be the expense-damage of including
> it as part of the base install?. Would it:
> 
> 1. Break the OS
Yes.  It would break the bug-for-bug, feature-for-feature, compatibility with
upstream EL, which is one of the goals of CentOS.

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 04:56:44PM +0200, Reindl Harald
wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 26.07.2012 16:50, schrieb Scott Robbins:
> > Unfortunately, according to folks who have more knowledge than I do
> > about these things, in later versions of Fedora, and therefore,
probably
> > the next version or so of RH, just manually editing
> > sysconfig/network-scripts will overlook some necessary parts.
> > system-config-network-tui may wind up becoming necessary. Through RH
> > 5.x it was enough to manually edit the necessary files.  
> 
> says who?
> 3.4.6-2.fc17.x86_64
> 
A few people on Fedora forums.  My own, very un-scientific evidence is
that once or twice, manually editing has given errors that I don't
believe were due to typos.  After getting bitten once, now I just
quickly set up the network, download network-tui and fix it.
> network.service has the same config as 10 years ago
> there is nothing preventing you disable networkmanager
> 
> [harry at rh:~]$ rpm -qa | grep system-config-network
Sorry if I was not clear on this.   My point is that Fedora is trying to
make it the default and pushing people to use it rather than the more
traditional tools.  At present, yes, it can still be disabled without
any special effort.



-- 
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6

Buffy: I lost a friend tonight and I may lose more! The whole 
world may be sucked into hell, and you want my help 'cause your 
girlfriend's a big ho?! Let me take this opportunity to NOT care!

On 2012-07-23, Fernando Cassia <fcassia at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Who was the genius that decided that system-config-network-tui should
> NOT be part of the base CentOS 6.3 install ??
>
> Not to mention it has insane deps like wifi firmware packages... not
> really if all you want to do is configure eth0 from the command
> line...
Wouldn't both of these decisions have been made upstream?

--keith

-- 
kkeller at wombat.san-francisco.ca.us

On 07/26/2012 06:33 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 26.07.2012 19:27, schrieb Karanbir Singh:
>> On 07/26/2012 04:42 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>>> My opinion after this experience is that it'd help for CentOS
to
>>> include system-config-network-tui as part of the base install. 
>>
>> Can you be a bit more specific about what you mean by a 'base
install' ?
>> Its not actually possible to get a minimalist @base only install
without
>> kickstarting the installer instance - at which point you might as well
>> +<package> whatever you need.
> 
> 
> says who?
erm, have you looked at the anaconda setup group selections ? None of
them default to an @base only install.
> you get a completly stripped down setup which
> no network, no editors like nano and have to
> do your first network config with echo to the
> config files which takes around 30 seconds
Are you saying here that even when you select a Desktop or Workstation
install profile you end up with a minimalist install ? I find that
pretty hard to believe.

-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
ICQ: 2522219    | Yahoo IM: z00dax      | Gtalk: z00dax
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

On 07/26/2012 11:33 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> i do not install every day a Fedora/CentOS
> the is a minimal or whatever option
My apologies. I expected you to have done due diligence before posting
on the subject.

-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
ICQ: 2522219    | Yahoo IM: z00dax      | Gtalk: z00dax
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc