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

Re: Wifi GNOME network manager version into KUbuntu, Debian "pinning method, etc. ; jor debian



On 08/07/2010 11:44 AM, giovanni_re wrote:
> KUbuntu 10.4,
> 
> =
> Failing to get wifi to connect to access point.  It can see APs, but
> fails to get dhcp via command mode, & fails connect with wicd.
> 
> =
> It has been suggested (on KUbuntu list?) to remove the KU network
> manager package, & that might get wicd & console command wifi working.
> 
<<--deleted-->
> 

My apologies for an Ubuntu/Kubuntu question/answer on a Debian list.
But, this could also be an issue in Debian, depending.  See explanation.

I think the problem with recent Kubuntu *and* Ubuntu *upgrades* is that
they allow both wicd and network manager to exist simultaneously on a
system.  This is the cause for failures, in my opinion.

Let me explain:

When I first tried out 'wicd', on a system with Network Manager
installed, I simply had the installer process the new package.  And the
installer forced the removal of network manager.

I recently upgraded to the latest Kubuntu release.  My 'old' setup was
using wicd, and nw was *not* installed.

After the upgrade, networking failed in odd ways.  After some research,
I found that the upgrade had installed network manager while leaving
wicd in place.

I removed nw and wicd now works as expected.  I think nw would have
worked 'as expected' had I removed wicd instead.

I don't know if this is an issue for Debian or not, as I don't know how
much of the Debian upgrade/installation configuration is kept 'as is' in
Ubuntu/Kubuntu.  And I have not done an upgrade of a wireless based
Debian system.

However, if you simply remove the KDE frontend for nw and install the
Gnome one (with all the related dependencies), or install wicd instead,
there should be no issue with updates to the *existing installed*
packages, hence no pinning should be needed.  This is how I'm doing it
and everything continues to work well.

The only thing that could be a problem would be a future upgrade,
assuming the installer processing is not fixed.

-- 
Bob McGowan


Reply to: