#587302 impossible to override offline mode when using network-manager

Package:
evolution
Source:
evolution
Description:
groupware suite with mail client and organizer
Submitter:
clohr
Date:
2025-08-17 17:47:23 UTC
Severity:
important
Tags:
#587302#5
Date:
2010-06-27 08:51:02 UTC
From:
To:
Evolution assumes that Network Manager is the only way to have network on a
system. Note that interfaces can either be managed by "/etc/network/interfaces"
or by Network Manager. However, if interfaces managed by NM are disconected,
Evo thinks there is no network at all, and start offline. Moreover, it refuses
to switch to online mode, eaven if the user requests it.

Possible workarround: before using Evo in online mode, plase ask first your
system administrator to disable Network Manager, or to unisnstall it. ;-)
#587302#10
Date:
2010-06-27 12:22:14 UTC
From:
To:
retitle 582358 impossible to override offline mode when using network-manager
forcemerge 582358 584200 587302
thanks

Doesn't this sound like #584200 or #582358?

Now, like for all the other bug reports, I don't have network-manager
(and I'm not interested in it), so I can't test. Maybe there's a bug and
people should be able to override the offline mode even when using
network-manager (though imho the whole point of NM is to give it your
network keys and let it do what it want, if you don't like it, don't use
it at all). But I have no way to check, so your best bet is to open the
bug *upstream* (there's now a text asking for that when using
reportbug), so you can explain exactly the wanted behavior and argue
with them (check before if there's no upstream issue already opened,
though)

Regards,
#587302#19
Date:
2010-06-27 14:11:55 UTC
From:
To:
Le 27/06/2010 14:22, Yves-Alexis Perez a écrit :

Sorry, you're right.
offline mode.
However:
- Evo should look at interfaces not managed by NM;
- the user must be able to change this descision.
system may have several interfaces, some are managed by NM, other not.

Thank you.

Regards
#587302#24
Date:
2010-06-27 14:25:42 UTC
From:
To:
The thing is (I don't know a lot about NM so I may say crap), “online”
status is global, not per-interface. So either you're online, either
you're not. The grey area where you're online on an interface not
managed by NM is impossible to manage. So maybe NM shouldn't manage it,
but if it does, it has to do it globally. If you disagree, then don't
use NM. (especially since “online” is fuzzy anyway, what if interface is
up but you're on a non-routed network? what if you're routed but
filtered?).

Afaict, NM works fine for simple cases. For the others, just do stuff
manually. But override offline/online status in evo won't be enough, it
should be handled in NM anyway.

Cheers,
#587302#33
Date:
2010-06-27 15:00:23 UTC
From:
To:
Le 27/06/2010 16:25, Yves-Alexis Perez a écrit :

This is a matter of semantic. What does it means "to be online"?
... to be online with what?
Evo is a network client. So it has to be online with its servers (imap,
smtp, etc.). To check this status, it can do a ping, or try
imap/smtp/etc. connection.

But Evo seems to check if the "global system is online" (why?)
Does it means "there exists a network interface that is up"? (this is a
rather weak criteria)
If it want to know that, it just has to do a "ip link show up". Don't
ask to NM.

If Evo is definitively incompatible with NM, I will make a choice
between the two ;-)
I use NM to manage the wifi interface. It does well the job. For the 3G
interface, I have some scripts, out of the scope of NM. From time to
time, I also have a VPN, not managed by NM.
So, it's not a good idea to ask NM if I am online or not.


The best thing to do is to do nothing.
Just do usual imap/smtp/etc. conections. If it works, great. If not,
suggests the offline mode.


Regards.
#587302#38
Date:
2010-06-27 15:07:25 UTC
From:
To:
Because you installed network-manager.

It's not incompatible. You just seem to not use network-manager the way
it's intended to.

If you don't like NM to be able to give a decision on online/offline
status, don't use NM. That's all (and that's my latest mail, I already
precised like hundred of mails ago that I didn't use NM and didn't care
about it.)

*Now*, I can understand that some people would like to, from time to
time, override offline decision. That may be a bug, but your best bet is
to open a bug *upstream* instead of here.

Regards,
#587302#43
Date:
2010-06-27 19:27:36 UTC
From:
To:
Le 27/06/2010 17:07, Yves-Alexis Perez a écrit :

I'm convince that it is out of it's scope.
Evo just need to reach email servers, and nothing else.
In some circumstances, these servers may be local, on an offline system...
At the opposite, servers may be unreachable even if the system is said
to be online (according to NM semantics: one of the interfaces it has to
manage is up)

The only way to know if servers are reachable is to try a connections.
Do one need to check it before all?

Maybe.

However, are you sure that Evo use it the way it's intended to?

I like NM, it does a good job for managing interfaces it is configured to.
Moreover, its decision on online/offline status is relevant, except that
it concerns only interfaces it is configured to manage. Developers of
other applications may misunderstand this point and use NM without
precautions.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=587325

Many thanks for your feed back.
Regards
#587302#48
Date:
2010-06-27 20:54:09 UTC
From:
To:
I guess you didn't really understand what “upstream” is? I mean
reporting to evolution developpers, in GNOME bugzilla, at
http://bugzilla.gnome.org.

Cheers,