| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
NetworkManager and ConnMan (Dan Williams' Blog)NetworkManager and ConnMan (Dan Williams' Blog)Posted Jun 25, 2009 18:04 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642)Parent article: NetworkManager and ConnMan (Dan Williams' Blog)
> Dan Williams discusses the advantages of NetworkManager over ofono and ConnMan on his blog.
Well, not really. He is rather refuting some NetworkManager bashing.
(Log in to post comments)
NetworkManager and ConnMan (Dan Williams' Blog) Posted Jun 26, 2009 2:29 UTC (Fri) by russell (subscriber, #10458) [Link]
Some of Dan's claimed features such as "integration" have never worked on fedora. I keep trying with each release but...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491449
without this, a system wide connection seems impossible ( which is ridiculous ). How is ntpd, sshd, etc suppose work without anyone logged in?
NetworkManager and ConnMan (Dan Williams' Blog) Posted Jun 26, 2009 8:13 UTC (Fri) by cyperpunks (subscriber, #39406) [Link]
Even better if you need net to login (e.g. NIS or LDAP auth)...
How hard can it be to understand that if you have put a network cable into the machine you want to have network connection?
NetworkManager and ConnMan (Dan Williams' Blog) Posted Jul 6, 2009 13:55 UTC (Mon) by stevem (subscriber, #1512) [Link]
See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=532670 for an example of why we've had to remove NM from most of the desktops at my company.
NetworkManager and ConnMan (Dan Williams' Blog) Posted Jun 26, 2009 11:01 UTC (Fri) by dcbw (guest, #50562) [Link]
People still wanted a way to make NetworkManager ignore an interface. That's what happened in that bug. NM_CONTROLLED=no was set in the ifcfg file, and thus NM ignores the interface just like the user requested.
Were NM_CONTROLLED not present or "yes", NM would be able to control that interface and bring it up before login.
|
|
||||||||||||