Re: trying to use wireless not from gnome... what's the incantation?
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:06 PM, Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 01:17:08PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> On Mon, 2016-05-23 at 12:10 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 11:39:06AM +0200, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
>> > > Login in Gnome once, activate wifi and ask that the connection should be used by
>> > > all users.
>> > > Then NM will save the password some were so that it connect without user login.
>> > Right... so you say non-Gnome users should keep a Gnome installation just to
>> > enter the wifi password, and log out+log in to Gnome whenever they visit a
>> > new place (which on a laptop means, quite often) then log out+log in back to
>> > their regular environment? I think I'll pass.
>> [...]
>>
>> You already have passed. Please stop spreading FUD about a program you
>> don't use and don't really know the state of.
>
> The original report from Britton Kerin doesn't look like FUD, what Vincent
> Bernat just confirmed and diagnosed: that the password UI is currently broken.
> Thus, I think my recommendation of trying wicd was helpful.
>
> Unlike network admins I work with (and who foam on the mouths at the words
> Network-Manager) I see it does have its uses: it can do a lot more than
> wicd. Instead of just wifi like wicd, it can do pppoe and a bunch of simple
> VPN setups.
>
> It also gets improvements. For example, all the years until and including
> jessie, it kept dropping configuration from usb0 interfaces every 30 seconds
> or so, even when explicitely told to leave it alone (the interface remained
> up but NM kept removing all IP addresses, etc). It took a while but this
> bug is finally fixed.
>
> But it's not without problems. The one Britton met is that NM's interface
> is closely married to Gnome. Yes, you can use nm-cli but it's nowhere near
> pretty, so on a laptop or a phone you want a GUI. Wicd's GUI works, NM's
> does not (at least currently or without extra messing).
>
> The second is, NM interferes with any complex setup. In newer versions, you
> can now semi-reliable tell it to stay away from your interfaces, but then,
> if you disable it on all interfaces, why do you even have it installed?
>
> That's not an exhaustive list, I indeed hardly ever deal with setups that
> would benefit from NM so I rarely look at it.
>
> But, how is mentioning an alternative and/or recommending to try one FUD?
>
>
> Meow!
> --
> An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy.
>
It is worth remembering that network manager depends indirectly on
systemd - not all of us have systemd installed. And not all of us know
(or knew in this case) the invocation to bring up the wifi connection.
--
darkestkhan
------------------------------------------
Feel free to CC me.
jid: darkestkhan@gmail.com
May The Source be with You.
Reply to: