On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Matthew Woehlke wrote: >> >> Ralf Corsepius wrote: >>> >>> Actually, I feel s-c-network should be revived and NetworkManager be made >>> strictly optional. >> >> I'd actually have to disagree. I *love* NM on my Asus (netbook). > > Congratulations. > > For me, > - NM doesn't work on any machine w/ WLAN > - NM is just bloated ballast on machines w/o WLAN I believe you are in a very small minority with that view. > >> It's >> >> great for laptops (or other computers that tend to move around and need to >> deal with "foreign" networks, > > Seemingly it's sufficiently functional for some people in such situation. I > don't have such demands. It's more than functional for most people in most situations. >> especially wireless networks), and it's "okay" for desktops. > > Yes, it works "sufficiently" on my desktops, but ... at which price? > ... Instability caused by silly "dark magic", Oh please. > ... no cli > ... no network profiles Both valid concerns. > ... bloat Made up over used word thrown around as as a subject non specific critic of any software someone doesn't like > My network isn't compliated (static IPs, static topologic, yp based autofs, > DHCP). > It's just that NM can't handle it properly. Since I've been told that NM can handle static IPs now, i don't see why any of the above would be a problem. -- Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin ( www.pembo13.com ) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
