Russ Allbery writes ("Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends"):
> Do we know for certain that installation of network-manager excludes
> alternatives? Tollef replied to me on debian-devel wondering why people
> who don't want to use network-manager just disable it, which implies that
> there's some means to turn it off while it's still installed. (I don't
> think I ever investigated that.)
I don't know that we have investigated that. But I do know that
having it install n-m might be a problem even if you can disable n-m
afterwards. For example, n-m might break your network on
installation.
> I'm not sure how significant that is to the decision, but it sounded like
> people are assuming that having network-manager installed excludes use of
> wicd or something else, so I want to be sure people aren't making
> decisions based on false premises.
Also ISTR reading some assertions in the discussion that people who
had previously installed n-m, found it troublesome and disabled it,
had it reenabled somehow. Not installing something is generally a
more reliable approach than asking people to fiddle with its config.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
