Arthur Pemberton wrote:
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
Come on... :)
A full-fledged daemon running all the time sitting on the system bus
waking up every few seconds (to eat CPU) which is going to do
ifconfig eth0 111.111.111.111/24 up
ip route add default via 111.111.111.222
echo "nameserver 111.111.111.123" > /etc/resolv.conf
And do it only *once* every reboot (which can easily be 30+ days).
This makes sense neither for servers nor for desktops.
It's useful for laptops which travel a lot (not even all laptops, cause
many of them are used as desktop-replacements).
What I'm asking for is to allow free choice, cause , you know, there is
no such thing as "one true way",
i.e. what is the only way in one situation may be completely useless and
even stupid in another.
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-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
