Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 09:34:34PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > >> Any device that has some complexer configuration in /e/n/i will just be >> ignored by NM. Sorry to say that, but I don't see another possibility. > > To be honest, I'd just like to see Network Manager require explicit > configuration in order to start when it notices that the system has a > configuration it can't understand. That way the user would have to > explicitly enable Network Manager and therefore we wouldn't get the > current problems where it gets installed for some reason (I think some > packages suggest or recommend it) and disrupts other software. If > someone does want to run Network Manager in a situation where it doesn't > understand the software then they could always configure it to start and > deal with whatever other software might be disrupted as they see fit. > > Any support for additional configurations would be nice but as you say > it'll never be everything.
I'm not entirely happy with the current situation either. But as etch is about to be released soon, any time I invest now will probably be lost time, because the patch won't make it into etch. And NM 0.7 (which brings support for static IP configurations upstream) will be released in the foreseeable future. Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
