bw writes ("Re: (solved) Re: wireless fail after stretch installation"): > I think the idea needs to be talked over a little better, because using > e/n/i for wireless by default after first boot has implications if the > user (who is clueless) later installs a desktop environment.
If installing a desktop environment, after putting the wireless in /e/n/i, does not work, then that is a bug in the desktop environment, surely ? In practice I would expect the config in /e/n/i to keep working because nowadays network-manager will ignore things in /e/n/i. The difficulty would only come if you - used the installer to install a bare system over wifi - later install network-manager or wicd - then expect the system to give you a gui prompt for new wifi networks, rather than expect to have to edit /e/n/i It would be possible for the n-m and wicd packages to spot when this is happening and offer to take over the interface. And I do think that in the absence of code to do that, it would be more important to make the barebones system work in the first place, than to improve the behaviour you later install n-m. (I'm not sure if what I say about wicd is right. I use n-m on machines I have where the user needs to switch between various network connections, wifi networks, etc.) > I'd hate to see the bug tracker turned into a discussion forum though. The bug tyracker is precisely the right place to discuss how to solve a particular bug. So I have CC'd it. Ian. -- Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own. If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.