On 11/14/11 at 10:22am, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 03:43 -0500, Rick Thomas wrote:
Can anybody tell me why I have wpasupplicant installed, even though I
don't have a wifi interface on this machine?
The machine has a single 10/100 twisted pair ethernet interface which
Can anybody tell me why I have wpasupplicant installed, even though I
don't have a wifi interface on this machine?
The machine has a single 10/100 twisted pair ethernet interface which
is configured static in the /etc/network/interfaces file. It does
not have any wifi hardware, and
i Rick1
I think the GNOME network-manager is simply designer to cater to all needs
of network. So wpa_supplicant would simply be a dependence, so the GUI can
really configure everything, that it says. If you remove wpa_supplicant and
also remove the other two packages, you you won't be able
Can anybody tell me why I have wpasupplicant installed, even though
I don't have a wifi interface on this machine?
Do you have GNOME installed? Through the dependency chain
wpasupplicant is required by network-manager, which is required by
gnome.
The machine has a single 10/100 twisted pair
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 03:43 -0500, Rick Thomas wrote:
Can anybody tell me why I have wpasupplicant installed, even though I
don't have a wifi interface on this machine?
The machine has a single 10/100 twisted pair ethernet interface which
is configured static in the
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Rick Thomas wrote:
Can anybody tell me why I have wpasupplicant installed, even though
I don't have a wifi interface on this machine?
The wpa is an unfortunate naming of the tool. It is required to
connect to any 802.1X network, including wired ethernet when 802.1X is
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 03:43:13 -0500, Rick Thomas wrote:
Can anybody tell me why I have wpasupplicant installed, even though I
don't have a wifi interface on this machine?
(...)
I neither have a wifi interface in my lenny system... let's see:
sm01@stt008:~$ apt-cache rdepends wpasupplicant
On Nov 14, 2011, at 8:35 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
If you use a static /etc/network/interfaces, you're likelly to be much
better off without that desktop fluff. IMHO, you should just get
rid of
it, at most you will lose the dekstop applets that show ethernet
state.
On Lu, 14 nov 11, 11:35:30, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
If you use a static /etc/network/interfaces, you're likelly to be much
better off without that desktop fluff. IMHO, you should just get rid of
it, at most you will lose the dekstop applets that show ethernet state.
Don't know
9 matches
Mail list logo
