On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 13:13 +0100, Carlos Garnacho wrote: > On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 10:30 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > <quote who="Dan Williams"> > > > > > If it's a priority, it can certainly be done. > > > > I don't think this is wildly important - it'll just increase maintainership > > requirements for you unnecessarily. > > > > What we do need, however, is some kind of co-operation between NM and the > > GNOME System Tools or other network configuration tools. This may involve > > replacing network-admin entirely (and have better fallbacks for non-Linux > > systems or crappy wifi chipsets when using NM). > > Separated as they are, there are things to improve in both concepts, and > users would be certainly happy to be able to manage things from both > feature sets, so it makes much sense to integrate. > > If the plan were to ditch network-admin, I'd recommend at least using > liboobs as the "safe" fallback, it already manages static configuration > for ethernet and wireless interfaces for many Unices quite reliably, and > other desirable stuff. additional rant , nm does not handle the below correctly. * static ip * multiple n/w profile > > If we don't ditch network-admin, what about a "enable roaming mode" > checkbox that deconfigures the wifi interface and lets NM do its job? > > Regards, > Carlos > > _______________________________________________ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list gnome org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- Ritesh Khadgaray LinuX N Stuff Ph: +919822394463 Eat Right, Exercise, Die Anyway.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature