On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:49:32AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 19:35 +0000, Anne Wilson wrote: > > I don't. It was configured once, and it doesn't need anything more. > > Ok, just a side discussion here. What would happen if you went to a > coffee shop and needed to use the wireless there, or to an office and > needed to use the encrypted wireless there? How do you configure for > that? A wpa_supplicant configuration file allows for many different networks but you have to edit it or you will be asked for a required information every time. Clearly NM, __when it happens to work__, is definitely more convenient although creating tools which would edit those config files "automagically" should be rather simple. It appears that few orders of magnitude simpler than getting NM into a shape. I already mentioned https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=413281 where NM messed up its configuration data and refused to recognize that all of that is bogus. Only an archeological dig in ~/.gconf plus quite a bit of a guesswork allowed me to recover. In comparison editing wpa_supplicant configurations is obvious and even documented ('man wpa_supplicant.conf'). It is not a question that NM could be often useful; only that priorities seems to be backwards. NM is not something entirely new, where you can expect "teething problems", but has been around already for a while. Michal -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
