[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Testing update wants to replace network-manager - will it be seamless?



On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 19:17 -0400, Patrick Wiseman wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 6:16 PM, Daryl Styrk <darylstyrk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 06:05:40PM -0400, Patrick Wiseman wrote:
> > > Hello:
> > >
> > > I can't afford to lose network access just at the moment, so should I
> > > wait to do today's update on my testing system (amd64)?  I've
> > > previously had troubles with network-manager but it's been working OK
> > > lately.  Will the update, so far as anyone knows, preserve settings,
> > > etc.?  Thanks for any guidance.
> > >
> >
> > With what?  wicd works great here on Lenny, and perfect on my other
> > Squeeze machine.  It was seemless.

Reading  http://bugs.debian.org/460691 , It seems that the maintainer
decided that network-manager(-gnome) and gnome-network-admin should
conflict because they do opposite thing.

> In today's update, gnome-network-admin conflicts with
> network-manager-gnome, which is therefore deleted, making
> network-manager and a few other things no longer needed.  If I try to
> hold gnome-network-admin, aptitude tells me that it "depends" on
> gnome-system-tools (= 2.22.1-4).  (I guess what it should be telling
> me is that I CAN'T hold it because the version of gnome-system-tools
> about to be installed is incompatible with the older version of
> gnome-network-admin.)  I can hold gnome-system-tools as well and keep
> network manager, which I guess is what I'll do for now.

I have removed network-manager-gnome* but not network-manager. My wired
network is still working (but I can't switch to wireless, etc...)
I'll reinstall network-manager-gnome as soon as I can.

*) make sure you get the .deb files before uninstalling the package,
   just in case you want to reinstall it;)

> I guess the question is why gnome-network-admin conflicts with
> network-manager-gnome in the first place, as it hasn't before.
Same here.
> But that's life on a testing system.

Regards,

Franklin


Reply to: