On Fri, 2018-06-29 at 07:46 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > On Fri, 2018-06-29 at 11:25 +0200, Thomas Haller via networkmanager- > list wrote: > > > > in this log, there is a message: > > > > systemd-journald[621]: Suppressed 1100 messages from > > NetworkManager.service > > Doh! I was looking at the wrong system when I looked for suppression > messages, so of course, I didn't see that one. My apologies. > > > also, there is > > > > (pc_bridge): add_pending_action (2): 'carrier-wait' already > > pending > > (expected) > > > > which is the last (visible) message telling something about > > pending- > > actions on pc_bridge device. > > Likely, that one is hanging. > > > > > > you would also see in the output of > > > > nmcli device > > > > that pc_bridge is in fact not fully activated (but pending > > activation). > > Yellow in nmcli device, which I suppose is pending activation. > > > A bridge cannot complete activation, until any slaves are attached. > > Hence, it is expected that > > startup-complete is never successfully reached (because activation > > is > > still pending for the bridge). > > Ultimately it would probably be useful for the NetworkManager-wait- > online.service to report why it failed. Not sure who is managing > that > unit. Probably not you folks.
No, NetworkManager-wait-online is part of NetworkManager. But it's not entirely clear *why* it's not ready, so helpful log is easier said than done. If your `nmcli d` output has still activating devices, that is a good indication... > So that damn bridge. That damn bridge has never worked properly. NM > cannot seem to wrap it's mind around enp2s0 being a bridge member and > not an interface of it's own. > > I really do actually want enp2s0 in the bridge and not on it's own > since I like to be able to bridge VMs with it. The last time NM got > confused about the bridge and enp2s0 I didn't have time to > reconfigure > it for the forty-eleventh time and just gave up on it until I had > time > to deal with it. I guess it fell by the wayside. :-( > > Hopefully this is the last time I'll have to fiddle with this > bridge. > A "Wired Interface" seems to have gotten added for the enp2s0 > interface > which I removed. > > Much thanks for all of the help! Cool. It should actually suffice that you have an type=ethernet profile for enp2s0, with connection.master=pc_bridge. In general, just ensure that you have the right profiles around, and that they are marked to autoconnect. There is also connection.autoconnect-priority setting (in case you have multiple profiles set to autoconnect -- for ethernet that is much less useful than for Wi-Fi). Anyway, by default, a profile that was used last, will be preferred to autoconnect next time. Or, alternatively, you can also set on the bridge connection.autoconnect-slaves=yes, which will the master cause to forcefully drag in all slave profiles (even if they themself are not marked for autoconnect). best, Thomas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ networkmanager-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
