On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 06:54:13PM -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
I am failing to resist responding to this troll.
I'm rather puzzled why you are resorting to personal attacks on me; I've
had a rather high opinion of you up to now.
I'll try an objective answer nevertheless.
Dbus access from
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:51, Sascha Silbe
sascha-ml-ui-sugar-de...@silbe.org wrote:
That wasn't the point, though: I'm not asking for _API_ access to
NetworkManager (I already got that using python), but for a CLI _tool_ to
use as an _administrator_ or _user_, not as a developer.
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:04, Sascha Silbe
sascha-ml-ui-sugar-de...@silbe.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:57:45AM +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
That wasn't the point, though: I'm not asking for _API_ access to
NetworkManager (I already got that using python), but for a CLI _tool_ to
use
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Sascha Silbe
sascha-ml-ui-sugar-de...@silbe.org wrote:
What I want to be able to do is exactly the same I can do using nm-applet.
That would be a good start. Reasonable feature parity with the old
network scripts would also be great.
The best that I can say of
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 14:25, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Sascha Silbe
sascha-ml-ui-sugar-de...@silbe.org wrote:
What I want to be able to do is exactly the same I can do using nm-applet.
That would be a good start. Reasonable feature
Sorry, Sascha, didn't mean for the attack to seem personal. And
Martin, I'm not sure NetworkManager is really the right tool for your
(server) job. NetworkManager's goal in life is dynamic roaming, not
static setups.
I'm not necessarily defending NM: lord knows I wish it had better docs
and a
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM, C. Scott Ananian csc...@cscott.net wrote:
Martin, I'm not sure NetworkManager is really the right tool for your
(server) job. NetworkManager's goal in life is dynamic roaming, not
static setups.
You'd be surprised: people are proposing complete removal of
Brief tutorial on Gobject: http://cananian.livejournal.com/58744.html
Sorry, Bernie you don't get any sympathy from me: XFConfig deserves to
die, no matter how much you liked it. And are you really running
Gentoo and complaining whenthings break? Seriously? That's the price
of unstable (and
Replying to quoted text is hard from my phone; bear with me.
On Monday, April 26, 2010, Sascha Silbe
sascha-ml-ui-sugar-de...@silbe.org wrote:
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 06:54:13PM -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
and NM supports a number of static data files for configuration if that's
what you
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 02:16:34PM -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
unified, perhaps, except that access from shell (last i looked)
was fairly inadequate.
So I'm not the only one to be disgusted by this trend?
Certainly not.
Modern Linux is becoming worryingly similar to MacOS and Windows.
In
I am failing to resist responding to this troll.
Dbus access from the command line is fairly good, and NM supports a
number of static data files for configuration if that's what you want
yo do. Fear not, scriptability of Unix systems is, if anything,
*increasing*, as there are now powerful ways
On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 18:54 -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
I am failing to resist responding to this troll.
Dbus access from the command line is fairly good, and NM supports a
number of static data files for configuration if that's what you want
yo do. Fear not, scriptability of Unix
12 matches
Mail list logo
