Re: Why gnome-system-tools aren't included yet [Was: Re: new modulesconsensus]
- From: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>
- To: Carlos Garnacho <carlosg gnome org>
- Cc: Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>, desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Why gnome-system-tools aren't included yet [Was: Re: new modulesconsensus]
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:13:02 -0400
On Mon, 2004-08-16 at 20:33, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> Well, and why can't the current g-s-t network tool/backends be the base
> for this?
It doesn't do the same thing - the way the network config stuff in
NetworkManager works is that the system asks the current user session
for the info. So your wireless essid and encryption key for example are
The g-s-t backends edit the files in /etc, which is a different
> Seriously, I see the network tool functionality as a really necessary
> part of the desktop and I'm proposing a code that works right now on
> 2.8, I can't believe it's being refused in favour of a code that I
> haven't even seen and which ideally will be ready in the next time
I don't care so much whether or not we put in the network tool for 2.8.
The point is where we go in the future and what the target audience is
defined to be for the various components. To me no-root-required
mostly-automated networking is a lot better and should be the goal.
> Even more, there are cases that can't be handled so easily (as I said
> several times: PPP connections, storing interfaces configuration in
> distro-specific files, WEP keys, ...)
WEP keys are already handled in NetworkManager in CVS. PPP could be done
in the same basic way (ask user session for the data to use), if we
wanted. Distro-specific files aren't an issue in this case since we're
defining the network information per user.
Anyway, don't let me stop you. I just thought the direction we were
taking in Fedora Core 3 was pretty relevant, since we are not doing the
same thing we've traditionally done.
] [Thread Prev