On 08:18 Mon 04 Apr , Raphael Hertzog wrote:
RH Hi,
RH On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote:
Stupid scheme (intended for stupid users) should be based on ifupdown
but shouldn't replace it.
RH Please refrain from calling people stupid users just because they use a
RH software that
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 10:52:33AM +0400, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote:
On 08:18 Mon 04 Apr , Raphael Hertzog wrote:
RH Hi,
RH On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote:
Stupid scheme (intended for stupid users) should be based on ifupdown
but shouldn't replace it.
RH Please refrain
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 00:00:01 -0700
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
There was a way User can do anything, the way was replaced by the way
User can do something in list. Obviously that this action has been
done for stupid users.
Yes, a user can do anything with ifconfig if his time
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 12:00:01AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 10:52:33AM +0400, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote:
On 08:18 Mon 04 Apr , Raphael Hertzog wrote:
RH Hi,
RH On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote:
Stupid scheme (intended for stupid users) should
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011, Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote:
There needs to be a simple tool with few dependencies and there needs
to be a complex solution with all the power that some users need. One
tool does not suit all here. It's not just about daemon vs GUI frontend
or whether to use
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:59:43PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011, Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote:
There needs to be a simple tool with few dependencies and there needs
to be a complex solution with all the power that some users need. One
tool does not suit all
On ma, 2011-04-04 at 00:18 +0400, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
If you read my mails without a prejudice you will notice it.
I have read all e-mails in this thread, and what constructive criticism
you may have given is buried under uncompromising prejudice. For
example:
If you mean the
On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 10:28:42PM +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I have read all e-mails in this thread, and what constructive criticism
you may have given is buried under uncompromising prejudice. For
example:
If you mean the ifupdown-based configuration, then I cannot agree that
it is
If you mean the ifupdown-based configuration, then I cannot agree that
it is really disastrous (I would agree that the network-manager
approach is really disastrous, however) as at least in my cases (which
are not so trivial) ifupdown works okay (and if not then at least I
would know ways how
9 matches
Mail list logo
