Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)
On Mon, 27 May 2019 09:29:46 +0200
Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> wrote:
> Quoting Patrick Bartek (2019-05-27 03:49:06)
> > Needing to convert this box from wired ethernet to wireless, I
> > searched for a suitable network manager and wicd looked good: No
> > desktop environment dependencies (I use a window manager Openbox and
> > single lxpanel), compatibility with Openbox, etc.
>
> [ unneeded systemd details snipped ]
>
> > After more investigating, I came across wifi-radar whose simulated
> > install doesn't muck my system. Any suggestions for something better?
> > I could just go with iwconfig or iw? No big deal. I've done it
> > before. But being lazy, if I can find an app to do the work, so much
> > the better.
>
> Here are the options I know of which provides a UI with wifi strength
> and being more lightweight than network-manager, listed in order of
> personal preference for install on Buster (some, iwd in particular, is
> notably less mature on Stretch):
>
> iwd is extremely lightweight console-only tool yet provides interactive
> probing of wifi strength. It integrates fine with network-manager and
> systemd if a) explicitly telling those systems to use it and b)
> explicitly turned off wpasupplicant.
>
> connman is in my experience more reliable than wicd but looks ugly.
>
> wicd felt unreliable in my experience - but possibly I didn't give it
> enough attention (see above about disabling wpasupplicant).
>
> iw + wifi-radar if all else fails. :-)
>
>
> - Jonas
>
>
> P.S. At first I skipped this excellent question due to it being
> presented as a rant about systemd. I dearly recommend to _avoid_ mixing
> rants with questions, as you then are more likely to miss valuable
> input.
My post WAS initially a report of anamolous behavior during
an install. I had read of other systemd quirks. (If no one knows, how
can it be fixed?) The last paragraph asking for network manager
recommendations other than wicd was an afterthought. You are correct:
I should have made it two posts.
B
Reply to: