one should have /etc/init.d/network-manager status option as well

Thank you for your bug report.

I created a patch that adds a status function by following the directions found here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/InitScriptStatusActions

I only added this function to the Debian init script because I wouldn't be able to test the function on the other distributions.

Hi, thanks for the patch.

would it make more sense to not only probe for the pid, but also whether NM is properly up and responding? One way to do that would probably be nm-tool ... or if thats too much we could send a dbus-send and see if get a reply.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Alexander Sack <email address hidden> wrote:
> would it make more sense to not only probe for the pid, but also whether
> NM is properly up and responding? One way to do that would probably be
> nm-tool ... or if thats too much we could send a dbus-send and see if
> get a reply.

Most init scripts simply check if there's a matching daemon process to
the specified pid.

However, if there's something more you can do with NetworkManager to
assert that it's actually running, that's great.

Is this something that you can handle in a subsequent upload, or would
you rather wait until you have all of this functionality ready?

:-Dustin

On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 02:55:05PM -0000, Dustin Kirkland wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Alexander Sack <email address hidden> wrote:
> > would it make more sense to not only probe for the pid, but also whether
> > NM is properly up and responding? One way to do that would probably be
> > nm-tool ... or if thats too much we could send a dbus-send and see if
> > get a reply.
>
> Most init scripts simply check if there's a matching daemon process to
> the specified pid.
>
> However, if there's something more you can do with NetworkManager to
> assert that it's actually running, that's great.
>
> Is this something that you can handle in a subsequent upload, or would
> you rather wait until you have all of this functionality ready?
>

I would like to go for the final solution directly as this should be
committed upstream ... I will talk to debian maintainer to align what
we want.

 - Alexander

Michael, what's your opinion on "status" for init.d script?

2009/1/29 Alexander Sack <email address hidden>:
> Michael, what's your opinion on "status" for init.d script?

The Debian network-manager init script has a "status" option.

Which reminds me, that it would probably be a good idea if Debian and
Ubuntu used the same name for the sysv init script (NetworkManager vs.
network-manager).

Would you mind merging the Debian 0.7.0 packages?
I think they have some nice improvements (general cruft removal from
debian/, symbols files, updated to newer Debian policy (e.g. Homepage
field and stuff).

Cheers,
Michael

--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 01:29:29AM -0000, Michael Biebl wrote:
> 2009/1/29 Alexander Sack <email address hidden>:
> > Michael, what's your opinion on "status" for init.d script?
>
> The Debian network-manager init script has a "status" option.
>
> Which reminds me, that it would probably be a good idea if Debian and
> Ubuntu used the same name for the sysv init script (NetworkManager vs.
> network-manager).
>
> Would you mind merging the Debian 0.7.0 packages?
> I think they have some nice improvements (general cruft removal from
> debian/, symbols files, updated to newer Debian policy (e.g. Homepage
> field and stuff).
>

I suggestd multiple times to join our efforts, but you never opted
into it ... usually debian is behind which is why i suggested to use
the ubuntu branches to work on.

For the sake of getting this done, I am fine to move this in a debian
hosted archive. Only technical issue is svn. Merging and doing distro
specific branches is just too cumbersome that it stays efficient imo.

Of course I would prefer to go for launchpad, but given that new NM is
in git, we can just go for alioth git. Please give me heads up what
you think.

 - Alexander

the sponsor team is still subscribed to this bug, should the change be uploaded or does it still require discussion in which case you should unsubscribe the sponsors

fwiw, our jaunty NetworkManager script has the status option in jaunty. I took the lsb-base lower version bound though.

Committed revision 2990

Thanks!

This bug was fixed in the package network-manager - 0.7-0ubuntu2

---------------
network-manager (0.7-0ubuntu2) jaunty; urgency=low

  * ppp 2.4.5git transition: bump ppp-dev lower version bound to 2.4.5~
    - update debian/control

  * fix LP: #120363 - NetworkManager should support smartcard based
    certificate; we apply the backend patch contributed by David Smith
    - add debian/patches/lp120363_smartcard_pkcs11.patch
    - update debian/patches/series

  [ Alessandro Ghersi <email address hidden> ]
  * fix LP: #270584 add the dependency network-manager-dev in
    libnm-glib-dev; also fixes LP: #321473 liferea doesnt handle
    network-manager online/offline state
    - update debian/control
  * update Standards-Version to 3.8.0
    - update debian/control

  [ Steven S Danna <email address hidden> ]
  * fix LP: #283416 - add /etc/init.d/NetworkManager status; init
    script was fixed upstream; however, we take the lsb-base lower
    version bound from the bug (>= 3.2-14)
    - udpate debian/control

 -- Alexander Sack <email address hidden> Sat, 14 Feb 2009 22:16:12 +0100