Also, I would prefer that the network be available when I am forced to use a console because (as an example) X crashes during bootup and will not function subsequently. /ken Anne Wilson wrote: > On Tuesday 06 January 2009 19:46:06 Craig White wrote: >> On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 14:05 -0500, Mark Haney wrote: >>> Tom Horsley wrote: >>>> On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 11:30:40 -0500 >>>> >>>> Mark Haney wrote: >>>>> I mean, why offer >>>>> the options in 's-c-n' if they aren't going to be implemented? >>>> Because virtually everything in the vicinity of NetworkManager >>>> is broken and needs another year or so of development to >>>> work right? :-). >>> Good Lord, if it's taken this long to make it even semi-functional, why >>> bother? I mean as far as I'm concerned NM is a joke. >> ---- >> One of NetworkManager's missions is to utterly frustrate and harass >> those that make no effort whatsoever to understand it's purpose and just >> want to muscle everything as root like they've always done. >> >> I agree that it's much easier to just disable it and then dismiss it as >> broken than it is to actually figure out what it's good for and how to >> live with it. >> >> I would bet dollars to doughnuts that everyone who dismisses >> NetworkManager out of hand also disables SELinux too. >> > If only life were that simple, Craig. When you've tried everything that has > been suggested and it still doesn't work, it's frustrating. (Though I'm not > adamant that the problem is actually NM) > > Anne > -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
