[arch-projects] [netcfg] [netctl] migration path
Dear all, The past few weeks, quite some people have tested netctl, the envisaged successor of netcfg. As it is, I would really like to migrate away from netcfg and towards netctl. If a 'direct' migration is too rough, it might be possible to write a hook and some wrapper scripts that emulate some/most of netcfg on a netctl system, but for most I think migration consists of only some variable renaming in the profiles. What would be the best way to migrate? I am thinking of the following steps: - move the github repository [1] back to Arch Projects - add a package to [testing], this would be version 1.0 - call for testers on the forums - perhaps change the PKGBUILD to contain replaces=netcfg - write an announcement and an installation message - move the package to [core] After this, Arch will have the first CLI for profile-based network management that extensively leverages systemd. Many of the above steps I am not allowed to do, so if there are no objections, I would like someone to help me out. Regards, - Jouke [1] https://github.com/joukewitteveen/netctl
Note: I have not tested or looked at the package, so these are only 'meta' comments. On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Jouke Witteveen <j.witteveen@gmail.com> wrote:
- perhaps change the PKGBUILD to contain replaces=netcfg
Does it? I mean: 1) could netcfg and netctl live side-by-side; and 2) is netctl backwards compatible with netcfg?
- write an announcement and an installation message - move the package to [core]
I think putting it in [extra] for a few releases would be more appropriate so we can see how it all shakes out. -t
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Jouke Witteveen <j.witteveen@gmail.com> wrote:
- perhaps change the PKGBUILD to contain replaces=netcfg
Does it? I mean: 1) could netcfg and netctl live side-by-side; and 2) is netctl backwards compatible with netcfg?
@1) yes, but they should not be installed simultaniously as they use the same folder for their profiles, but the profiles are not interchangeable unless you define all variables twice. @2) no.
- write an announcement and an installation message - move the package to [core]
I think putting it in [extra] for a few releases would be more appropriate so we can see how it all shakes out.
Thats okay, but I don't plan on maintaining two similar projects of which I think one is a dead end. I think it is a good thing Arch has the essentials of a profile-based network configuration out of the box. Keep in mind that openresolv needs to move to [core] if netctl ends up over there. As said before, netctl + openresolv is still less lines of code than netcfg. - Jouke
participants (2)
-
Jouke Witteveen
-
Tom Gundersen