Control Center App vs nm-connection-editor

Hi, We have both, Gnome Control Center's Network app and the nm-connection-editor, to perform network related changes via a GUI. Is either one of them replacing the other? Which one is more current (in regards to NetworkManager)? Is nm-connection-editor targeted for those using a desktop

Re: Control Center App vs nm-connection-editor

- Original Message - From: Jorge Fábregas jorge.fabre...@gmail.com To: networkmanager-list@gnome.org Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 12:50:24 PM Subject: Control Center App vs nm-connection-editor Hi, We have both, Gnome Control Center's Network app and the

Re: [network manger] : overriding default IPv4 routing.

On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 12:20 +0530, Manoj Manthena wrote: Thanks for the reply Dan. My primary use case is: 1)If wireless connection is available, always IPv4 routing should happen through this interface though other wired interfaces exist. 2)If wireless connection is not available, then

Re: Control Center App vs nm-connection-editor

On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 07:50 -0400, Jorge Fábregas wrote: Hi, We have both, Gnome Control Center's Network app and the nm-connection-editor, to perform network related changes via a GUI. Is either one of them replacing the other? Which one is more current (in regards to NetworkManager)? Is

Re: dhclient: avoiding hostname disclosure via DHCP request

This turns out to be a bug in the 'ifcfg-rh' config file parsing plugin. I've fixed it in git upstream, but a temporary workaround would be: DHCP_HOSTNAME=wont-be-used DHCP_SEND_HOSTNAME=no DHCP_SEND_HOSTNAME was only parsed if DHCP_HOSTNAME was also given. Hi Dan, I'm sorry to bother

Re: dhclient: avoiding hostname disclosure via DHCP request

As every new SSID generates a new ifcfg-.. file, one additional question came up: Is there a way to make DHCP_SEND_HOSTNAME=no be in every new ifcfg- file by default? (adding it after the fact it was created would be pointless since the hostname would have been submitted already by then)