Jaunty Static IP address

[Gene Heskett]

On Sunday 26 April 2009, Derek Broughton wrote:
>Ric Moore wrote:
>> On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 18:54 -0400, Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>>> Paul Lemmons wrote:
>>> > Interesting... I thought we were supposed to moving *away* from backend
>>> > file editing. I have not had to do this for a very long time.
>>>
>>> Odd...  I thought that additional layers of abstraction are only
>>> worthwhile when they make things simpler.  And I have /never/ found
>>> NetworkManager simpler for static IPs.
>
>NetworkManager never _supported_ static IPs.
>
>> It's been the bane of existance for eons on the Fedora list. It's been
>> sworn at for so long that I have to wonder why it keeps being
>> included. :) Ric
>
>It keeps being included because it does the job very well for the vast
>majority of users.  And with Ubuntu's policy of simply excluding any
>interface that was in /etc/network/interfaces from NetworkManager control,
>it was pretty easy for the few who needed a static IP to have it.
>--
>derek

Sorry derek, but I have to echo ric's comments.  For those of us running a 
home network with all static addresses, behind a NATing router, NM is pure 
poison, and gets disabled/nuked at the first opportunity I can get a shell 
opened to do it.  And any distro that links it such that it can't be 
disabled/removed without gutting the gui, will be replaced by a distro that 
doesn't, its that simple for us.  So make NM a dependency of something 
important at your own peril.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Look into my eyes and try to forget that you have a Macy's charge card!