Reinhard Tartler wrote:
We are talking here only about the cornercase of some random custom
scripts, which start wpa_supplicant using /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf
You mean we should leave 'zombie' files around on the filesystem on
package upgrades? Wouldn't that violate Policy?
And this also keeps
On 2 May 2006 at 17:19, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > lowVery trivial items that have defaults that will work in the
> >vast majority of cases; only control freaks see these.
> > medium Normal items that have reasonable defaults.
> > high Items that don?t have a reasonable default.
> >
On Wednesday 03 May 2006 09:05, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> but the bug submitter seem
> to have confirmed that he uses custom scripts, which use
> /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf,
Right, the "custom script" (which was in fact a direct call of wpa_supplicant
via pre-up in /e/n/i) used /etc/wpa_supplicant.
Hi,
On Mi, 2006-05-03 at 09:05 +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> We are talking here only about the cornercase of some random custom
> scripts, which start wpa_supplicant using /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf.
Oh, sorry, I thought you decided to leave people's setup in a working
state for all users, incl
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 11:15:49PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 03.05.2006, 06:44 +1000 schrieb Kel Modderman:
> > Leaving /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf
> > intact if its been modified would go a long way to making the transition
> > a bit smoother.
>
> Doesn't that requ
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Since this issue won't break the system, but 'only' the wireless network
connection (which is grave enough in some cases), I really don't think
that 'critical' is appropriate. But thats certainly subject to personal
opinion.
I still think that this is kind of debconf ab
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 02:42:51PM +0100, Michael Tweedale wrote:
> On 2 May 2006 at 22:05, Kel Modderman wrote:
> > >place, so that custom scripts will stind find it. However I think this
> > >is a quite seldom cornercase, and I highly doubt this would satisfy the
> > >submitter.
> >
> > Well, l
Felix Homann wrote:
And just in case Reinhard did not understand: If you
leave /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf in place on upgrades I regard the issue I
reported in Bug#365613 as fixed!
Clarification: only leave /etc/wpa_supplicant alone if its been edited,
remove the file if it has not changed s
On Tuesday 02 May 2006 15:06, Kel Modderman wrote:
> Clarification: only leave /etc/wpa_supplicant alone if its been edited,
> remove the file if it has not changed since installation.
>
> Kel.
Sure, that's the right way to do it.
Thanks,
Felix
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wi
On Tuesday 02 May 2006 14:05, Kel Modderman wrote:
> Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 09:34:31PM +1000, Kel Modderman wrote:
> >>> We could surely keep the conffile in place, but would this really fix
> >>> the issue?
> >>
> >> If you were invoking wpa_supplicant by an own script
10 matches
Mail list logo
