Announcing ConnMan.net [LWN.net]

Announcing ConnMan.net

Posted Jun 24, 2009 5:59 UTC (Wed) by Cato (guest, #7643)
In reply to: Announcing ConnMan.net by njs
Parent article: Announcing ConnMan.net

The grandparent post was on-topic and quite useful - I have the same experience with Network Manager and end up using wicd as well, and I've seen quite a lot of discussion of this. wicd is also more appropriate for low-end machines with less than 200 MB RAM.

to post comments

Announcing ConnMan.net

Posted Jun 24, 2009 16:54 UTC (Wed) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link]

The one time I tried wicd it made my eyes bleed. I don't know how somebody could possibly recommend it over network-manager except on very low resource machines.. and even then I think that just using the default Debian network configuration scripts would be superior.

I think that most people are basing their impressions on Network-Manager 0.6 stuff, which was abismal. The 0.7.1 is vastly superior in all respects.

I have yet to run into any way other then Network-Manager to make using a tethered phone, 3G network adapter, or anything of that nature even remotely usable in Linux*.

I wouldn't mind seeing a better more modular solution then NM. If somebody had a very nice command line client for NM then that would be terrific. Maybe Conman will be better since it seems to be designed for small devices like Cell phones and whatnot.

But so far nothing I've seen comes close to trying to fix the problems NM is trying to fix.

* and if any solution anybody is using involves ppp your solution sucks.. modern devices don't work like that anymore and if they can be configured through ppp and chat scripts then that means that it's in 'legacy' mode and performance and reliability will suffer.

Announcing ConnMan.net

Posted Jun 25, 2009 9:34 UTC (Thu) by mbiebl (subscriber, #41876) [Link] (1 responses)

You are aware that wicd is implemented in python?
How does that make it more appropriate for low-end machines?
/me being puzzled

Announcing ConnMan.net

Posted Jun 25, 2009 17:53 UTC (Thu) by walters (subscriber, #7396) [Link]

Because basically no one does any actual measurement, they just believe and repeat what's been written by some guy on some website (often without instructions to reproduce).

Or they equate say a list of library dependencies with memory use, when in the real world it's very likely user interface strings, images, or plain old memory leaks that are actually using memory.