Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> Don Armstrong writes ("Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome"):>> The primary case of NM breaking things is when it's installed with >> wicd, AFAICT. The other cases of NM breaking things are RC bugs in NM. > There are no other competitors to wicd and n-m then ? It's also possible to configure wireless networking manually without using either wicd or ifup and using wpa_supplicant directly, but I think that's close enough to the ifup use case (and similar enough from the n-m perspective) that we can consider it the same. There may be other more comprehensive systems like n-m and wicd, but if so I've not heard of them. > They do indeed appear to strongly believe that but they have advanced no > cogent reasons. (You agree, don't you, that they haven't advanced any > cogent reasons?) Actually, Josselin did say, in one of his recent messages, the reason that I had hypothesized: that n-m is so much better that he's not sure that people who previously opted out of n-m stated a preference that should apply to the current n-m. Whether or not one agrees with that reason, I do think it's cogent and goes directly to the point, namely upgrade behavior. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
