Hi Marco. On Sun, 2012-08-19 at 19:41 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > NM, as a design goal, is not supposed to be able to manage every > possible configuration. Well but then it shouldn't be kind of a default package. And yes, I know, strictly speaking it's neither required nor essential. But as I mentioned before, more and more uses it... and one usually get's it already with gnome-core. After all, isn't Debian the "Universal Operating System" ... or is it the "works with only one scenario OS" ;-) And to be honest, I don't think that it's impossible that NM would integrate well with ifupdown (and the others). Don't take it personal (and I guess neither should even the NM developers)... but saying "it's not intended to such complex stuff" sounds sometimes like an excuse. > > Or will we just mothball ifupdown silently and slowly (as it's replaced > > by NM). > As explained, NM is not a general ifupdown replacement. Ok,... but e.g. on a laptop it's very useful (easily selecting any wireless networks and such)... but as I outlaid above it more or less breaks ifupdown and doesn't work quite well with some others... so if I not only want to go online with my laptop, but do a little more,... I'm already screwed. Cheers, Chris.
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature