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

Re: (solved) Re: wireless fail after stretch installation

bw writes ("Re: (solved) Re: wireless fail after stretch installation"):
> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I have read the bug logs and Trent Buck's message here
> >   https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=694068#47
> > seems to suggest a way forward.
> > 
> > Perhaps someone would care to write and test a patch to d-i's network
> > configuration arrangements, to implement Trent's suggestion ?  I think
> > that the people who don't have network-manager would probably prefer
> > this to use ifupdown, and making a whole new udeb will be work, so
> > Trent's second suggestion seems sensible.
> Second suggestion being networkd preferred over ifupdown?  yeah, I had 
> thought this was going to come up eventually.  State it in plain english, 
> if ifupdown is to be replaced, then let's get on with it.

I appreciate that you have reason for your paranoia, but in this case
it is entirely misplaced.  You have misunderstood me.  I meant this
part of Trent's suggestion:

|  If you don't want to udebify wpa_passphrase, you can do it by hand:
|      cat >"/etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant-$iface.conf" <<EOF
|      network={
|	 ssid="$ssid"
|	 psk="$passphrase"
|      }
|      EOF

which is part of a suggestion of how to configure ifupdown in the
installed system.

> I think the whole thread is unfortunate, because it was started by a 
> person (Long Wind) who earlier posted a request for help about how to hack 
> into their neighbor's wireless network to steal internet service.

"Whatever".  Now, this thread is about Bug#694068.  Which is annoying
a number of people and should be fixed.

> I'm really shocked that anybody would try and make wireless easier to use 
> for thieves.  They should be shunned, not used as example clueless users 
> to implement fixes or new features.

I struggle to see how fixing #694068 is about helping "thieves".


Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Reply to: