Re: NM without X
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 13:43 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 23 mars 2012 à 13:35 +0100, Svante Signell a écrit :
> > Can the Network Manager be controlled/started/configured in console mode
> > when X is not running? If the answer to the above questions is yes,
> > maybe that setting (making Network Manager work also without X) would be
> > the default!
>
> The answer is yes to the three questions; for controlling it’s a bit
> complicated with the existing CLI tools, but it is very easy to
> configure connections with ini-like configuration files and start them
> without X.
Another user-friendly tool :-(
Regarding configuration of different tools, clicking here and there is
becoming more like the M$ world. There you never know where the
configuration information is stored, and if you happen to know you
cannot edit a configuration file, since you need a graphical
configuration tool to do any changes. Same problem seems to apply to
gconf and its successor(s). Where have the tools/services/programs that
use a simple text file for configuration gone?
A side question: Why does not all applications (X or not) needing
internet work with ifupdown, only with NM??
> And for wired connections, it *is* the default.
I have a wired connection for that computer, so the wireless stuff does
not apply for this case.
> The reason why NM failed in the situation described is completely
> unrelated to X, it was related to libpcre which NM also uses.
OK, got it!
> Again, libpcre is a vital part of the system and it should be treated with that
> much attention.
Yes, obviously.
Reply to: