Timothy Murphy wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
Hmm - I had a problem with NM. I reported it. I gave feedback as and
when
requested. The problem is solved. I'm not complaining :-)
I agree with you in principle.
But it is very difficult to pin down a problem that only arises
from time to time.
Tim wrote:
> Timothy Murphy:
>> I'm afraid you are viewing Fedora with rose-tinted spectacles.
>
> And I counter claim the reverse. You look at Windows through
> rose-tinted glasses, and at Fedora though broken glass.
Not so.
I use Linux (Fedora and Centos) 95% of the time, by choice.
But I fi
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 09:11 -0700, Phil Meyer wrote:
> It is my opinion, that non technical persons should not touch a
> computer at all, but that is unrealistic in today's society.
I have similar feelings. I view being asked to fix up someone else's
computer with the same amount of enthusiasm as
Tim:
>> Perhaps. But then they might find Windows just as aggravating. I
>> know I find it more so.
Timothy Murphy:
> I'm afraid you are viewing Fedora with rose-tinted spectacles.
And I counter claim the reverse. You look at Windows through
rose-tinted glasses, and at Fedora though broken gla
Ed Greshko wrote:
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Matthew Flaschen wrote:
I agree that it's great if users look at logs and send them to
technicians when appropriate. My point is just that if they don't
understand them, don't want to look them up, and don't want to report
the issue to someon
Tim wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 12:57 +, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>> I think someone who just wanted a system that works,
>> and wasn't willing to experiment and read about the system,
>> would find Fedora very frustrating.
>
> Perhaps. But then they might find Windows just as aggravating.
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 12:57 +, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> I think someone who just wanted a system that works,
> and wasn't willing to experiment and read about the system,
> would find Fedora very frustrating.
Perhaps. But then they might find Windows just as aggravating. I know
I find it more
Ed Greshko wrote:
>>> I agree that it's great if users look at logs and send them to
>>> technicians when appropriate. My point is just that if they don't
>>> understand them, don't want to look them up, and don't want to report
>>> the issue to someone who will, then they should just ignore the
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>
>> I agree that it's great if users look at logs and send them to
>> technicians when appropriate. My point is just that if they don't
>> understand them, don't want to look them up, and don't want to report
>> the issue to someone who will, then
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 12:28 -0500, Robert L Cochran wrote:
> By the way my Network Manager implementation works okay with my
> wireless hardware. I've discovered that it needs an amazingly long
> time to build a connection to the access point -- I think there is
> some sort of timing issue with it.
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>
>
>> I agree that it's great if users look at logs and send them to
>> technicians when appropriate. My point is just that if they don't
>> understand them, don't want to look them up, and don't want to report
>> the issue to someone who will, t
Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> I agree that it's great if users look at logs and send them to
> technicians when appropriate. My point is just that if they don't
> understand them, don't want to look them up, and don't want to report
> the issue to someone who will, then they should just ignore the lo
Beartooth wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:28:50 -0500, Robert L Cochran wrote:
>
>
>> I agree that whatever a process can send to a system log, for purposes
>> of error output, the better. If a URL could be supplied by a log message
>> pointing to a resource that can help explain the meaning of
On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:28:50 -0500, Robert L Cochran wrote:
> I agree that whatever a process can send to a system log, for purposes
> of error output, the better. If a URL could be supplied by a log message
> pointing to a resource that can help explain the meaning of the exact
> error code, that
Robert L Cochran wrote:
> Speaking as someone who fixes other people's computers for money, I
> wish that "regular users" of every flavor would get accustomed to
> looking at log messages. Or at least email them to me on request.
I agree that it's great if users look at logs and send them to
tech
I agree that whatever a process can send to a system log, for purposes
of error output, the better. If a URL could be supplied by a log message
pointing to a resource that can help explain the meaning of the exact
error code, that would be a great help too, because it saves the
technician's time in
Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
> If you never want to see the error messages, then turn off sending
> them to the log files. You can configure (r)syslog to throw them
> away.
That's another valid option, if you really think the logs are harming
your performance (the impact is usually negligible for de
Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> Marc Wilson wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 10:54:17PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>> This is debugging output intended for wireless driver developers only, you
>>> are not expected to understand it.
>> Then it shouldn't be outputting it, unless it's asked for.
>
> That
Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 10:54:17PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> This is debugging output intended for wireless driver developers only, you
>> are not expected to understand it.
>
> Then it shouldn't be outputting it, unless it's asked for.
That's a ridiculous statement. /var
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 10:54:17PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> This is debugging output intended for wireless driver developers only, you
> are not expected to understand it.
Then it shouldn't be outputting it, unless it's asked for.
--
Marc Wilson | Tell me what to think!!!
m...@cox.net
On Sun, 2009-03-01 at 17:05 -0500, Robert L Cochran wrote:
> >> Part of the problem here is understanding the difference between the
> >> network service and the NetworkManager service. The network service
> >> will connect before you log in, while the NetworkManager service
> >> connects after you
2009/3/1 Kevin Kofler :
> suvayu ali wrote:
>> To add to the discussion, NM doesn't connect to the network without a
>> gui. That seems a rather shortsighted design. I found this the hard
>> way today when my gui got screwed after an update and some ill
>> considered tinkering.
>
> This is only tru
Robert L Cochran wrote:
> plugins=ifcfg-fedora
That's the plugin which is supposed to handle settings from
system-config-network. But I think this feature is mainly tested with wired
networks. Some wireless stuff is known not to be supported, for example
WPA. (The Fedora ifcfg settings have no set
>> Part of the problem here is understanding the difference between the
>> network service and the NetworkManager service. The network service
>> will connect before you log in, while the NetworkManager service
>> connects after you log in. You normally want to run only one of
>> these services. I
suvayu ali wrote:
> To add to the discussion, NM doesn't connect to the network without a
> gui. That seems a rather shortsighted design. I found this the hard
> way today when my gui got screwed after an update and some ill
> considered tinkering.
This is only true if you don't have a systemwide
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> I probably shouldn't have said "error message".
> I should have said "informational message".
> Surely it would take very little effort to explain what
> "device state change: 1 -> 2" actually means?
This is debugging output intended for wireless driver developers only, you
2009/3/1 Mikkel L. Ellertson :
> Robert L Cochran wrote:
>> I too am having a problem with Network Manager, and like Anne, I should
>> file a bug and provide feedback if requested. In my case Network Manager
>> seems to have a terribly difficult time connecting to my wireless
>> network before I lo
Robert L Cochran wrote:
> I too am having a problem with Network Manager, and like Anne, I should
> file a bug and provide feedback if requested. In my case Network Manager
> seems to have a terribly difficult time connecting to my wireless
> network before I login. I always have to force a restart
--- On Sun, 3/1/09, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> From: Timothy Murphy
> Subject: Re: NM: the usual rant
> To: fedora-list@redhat.com
> Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 11:51 AM
> Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> >> I'm having problems with NM again.
> >> I ofte
I too am having a problem with Network Manager, and like Anne, I should
file a bug and provide feedback if requested. In my case Network Manager
seems to have a terribly difficult time connecting to my wireless
network before I login. I always have to force a restart of the network
service in order
Anne Wilson wrote:
> Hmm - I had a problem with NM. I reported it. I gave feedback as and
when
> requested. The problem is solved. I'm not complaining :-)
I agree with you in principle.
But it is very difficult to pin down a problem that only arises
from time to time.
In my experience NM st
Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>> Surely Linux error messages should be intelligible
>> by the common user?
>> Or are they intended solely for gurus?
>
> Some are for end users, some are for gurus (meant for posting on bug
> reports and mailing lists). "Translating" every error message is not a
> good
Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> I'm having problems with NM again.
>> I often have to re-boot once or twice before it connects.
>
> It's probably a bug in your network (wireless?) driver rather than NM.
> What driver are you using?
orinoco_cs .
My impression is that NM does not wait long enough at some p
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 15:57:05 +
Alan Cox wrote:
> If you want to look at poor practice then gdm is a far better example
Oh there is no doubt of that. I downloaded the source for gdm
to try and understand how I might fix bug 451562, and it boggles
the mind. An app who's one job is to validate a
> Didn't I agree NM was a nightmare? But your problem is not NM. Your
> problem is you don't have a realistic view of software development
> practices.
If you want to look at poor practice then gdm is a far better example -
that *used* to be a usable piece of software then it got "improved" and
Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:26:09 -0500
> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>
>> They read the source and developer
>> documentation and solve the problem themselves
>
> Too bad the NM developers didn't feel like doing that
> to fix the problems with network instead of deciding
> to just ch
On Sunday 01 March 2009 15:35:09 Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:26:09 -0500
>
> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> > They read the source and developer
> > documentation and solve the problem themselves
>
> Too bad the NM developers didn't feel like doing that
> to fix the problems with network
On Sun, 2009-03-01 at 10:35 -0500, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:26:09 -0500
> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>
> > They read the source and developer
> > documentation and solve the problem themselves
>
> Too bad the NM developers didn't feel like doing that
> to fix the problems with net
Tom Horsley wrote:
> Too bad the NM developers didn't feel like doing that
> to fix the problems with network instead of deciding
> to just chuck everything and write a completely
> non-functional incompatible "replacement".
What you're seeing are bugs in the _driver_, not in NM!
Kevin Ko
On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:26:09 -0500
Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> They read the source and developer
> documentation and solve the problem themselves
Too bad the NM developers didn't feel like doing that
to fix the problems with network instead of deciding
to just chuck everything and write a complete
Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:07:31 -0500
> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>
>> "Translating" every error message is not a
>> good use of developer time.
>
> Yes, it is a far better use of developer time to be inundated
> by folks asking what the hell obscure messages and behaviour means.
On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:07:31 -0500
Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> "Translating" every error message is not a
> good use of developer time.
Yes, it is a far better use of developer time to be inundated
by folks asking what the hell obscure messages and behaviour means.
But, not to worry, it won't be th
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> I'm having problems with NM again.
> I often have to re-boot once or twice before it connects.
It's probably a bug in your network (wireless?) driver rather than NM. What
driver are you using?
> What is error -34?
A kernel error code.
> How can one find out?
There's an
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Surely Linux error messages should be intelligible
> by the common user?
> Or are they intended solely for gurus?
Some are for end users, some are for gurus (meant for posting on bug
reports and mailing lists). "Translating" every error message is not a
good use of develop
I'm having problems with NM again.
I often have to re-boot once or twice before it connects.
But that is not the subject of this rant.
To try to make sense of what is happening
I have been looking through NM entries in /var/log/messages
and I find these less than helpful.
Was ever so much written
I'm having problems with NM again.
I often have to re-boot once or twice before it connects.
But that is not the subject of this rant.
To try to make sense of what is happening
I have been looking through NM entries in /var/log/messages
and I find these less than helpful.
Was ever so much written
46 matches
Mail list logo
