(In reply to Dominique Leuenberger from comment #7) > (In reply to Marius Tomaschewski from comment #6) > > (In reply to Dominique Leuenberger from comment #4) > > > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager/commit/data/ > > > NetworkManager.service.in?id=1d89bc0004ec27fbc0c89f17861118c78d7eeab5 and > > > the referenced bug (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876218#c49) > > > have a very nice story why NM is not tearing down the network on 'systemctl > > > stop NetworkManager' > > > > > > => on a shutdown, if you have a NFS mounted root, the root 'disappears' on > > > you and the shutdown hangs... > > > > Ah... yes. Then I'd say: kill -9 dhclient in this case would do the right > > thing (same as sysconfig were doing before ;-) > > done by what? if we don't want it and do not care for remote FS root, then > we can disable this and simply kill the network on the go; By NM when there is a remote FS. > Question would be: what is more common: > - User switching NM off completely to switch to wicked > (if done through Yast, yast should be able to take care of terminating > dhclient as well) > if done by means of services, well, the user better know what he does :) Skilled user -- perhaps: when he notices this left over. Otherwise there is dhclient running and breaking the currently used network service. > of > > updating NetworkManager package and triggering a restart (on Factory this > happens often... ) > > => I'm in favor of keeping NM the way it is; and for the case of a user > switching between NM and wicked, have yast to the right things (which would > mean for this bug: 'wontfix'...it actually does not describe an explicit > issue after all It is IMO definitely not a WONTFIX as it breaks networking. The new service isn't able to work properly when the old leaves running dhcp clients. The problem is also: when you start dhclient again, the dhclient script _may_ deconfigure the interface / address family it currently handles; this depends on the script implementation of course.