231–240 of 274 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> journalctl -fu NetworkManager Perfectly sums up my feelings about NetworkManager.
What so bad about Network Manager? nmcli is really useful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is this little things that made me move away from GNU/Linux as main laptop OS. The OS is great when it works, but then those little things are always around the corner, turning weekend actions into weeks.
Indeed. But it is still my main OS everywhere, I refuse to bow to proprietary overlords. Despite these downsides.
when linux works, it's wonderful; when not, it's a pain in the a*^
when linux works, it's wonderful; when not, it's a pain in the a*^
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wish that browsers and applications would keep firing spawning and firing requests at a rate beyond human perception, until one succeeds. I do not think you would enjoy the network conditions that come with that behavior. The point about killing old sockets early when switching wifi makes a lot of sense, however.
Well, the problem is really that the network isn't even connected properly in the first place. I agree that it shouldn't behave badly while actually on the network. It's just odd that madly hitting refresh while wifi is reconnecting actually gives me a sooner and faster page load than letting the machine load by itself. That means there is something can be automated but unfortunately isn't being automated.
It will probably happen eventually, at least in Linux, after a few more years of commercial pressure to make it suck less.
How is it that for the last decade I've been running Linux on whatever decent machines I was primarily using and whatever random garbage I could get my hands on and I haven't had any of these problems that people are perpetually complaining about? Are these people using some kind of exotic hardware? Am I just really lucky?
Just FYI, this response has about the same validity that refutation of online anonymity / pseudonymity as a non-issue does: simply because you're not experiencing a problem doesn't mean others aren't, and doesn't make their frustrations any less valid. I've used Unix for over 25 years, Linux for over 17. It's my platform of choice, I very, very rarely use anything else. And my Thinkpad T520i listing a "03:00.0 Networ…
The most robust laptop I've had on wifi was a Samsung running Fedora 20. Very fast to connect and never dropped. The pre-installed Windows 7 dropped continuously and often failed to connect.
I suspect the "issue" may be very hardware dependent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What so bad about Network Manager? nmcli is really useful.
Unnecessarily complex daemon; three lines in /etc/network/interfaces and a few shell scripts will suffice, thank you very much.
Making things that "just work" means handling complexity for users, and leads to somewhat complex code. Debian's static network configuration is great for servers and okay for desktops that never move. But it's nothing that you should put on laptops operated by enterprise users (the people that pay for Linux desktop development). Imagine users calling support from a Starbucks, trying the edit the wifi config files.
It only gets worse on headless/embedded/arm machines. The RPi list of Wi-Fi adapters gives something of a picture: http://elinux.org/RPi_USB_Wi-Fi_Adapters Note the number of ones which require some additional configuration steps, downloads, patches, or other monkeying around. And don't even get me started on connman and wicd.
wicd is pretty dead. It uses deprecated kernel features that will be removed at some point and with no maintainer for wicd, it will just stop working.
One of a handful reasons I don't have Linux on my laptop anymore, even though I like so many things about Linux so much more. I'm not sure about this point, though: > Connection time. I dislike OS X pretty deeply and think that many of its technical merits are way overblown, but it's got one thing going for it; it connects to an AP fast. I remember Linux being slow (and unreliable) at this, but OSX is pretty slow too…
This is one of the reasons I've stopped running Linux 'bare metal' and have instead always just used an OS with good drivers to serve as a VM host. Every time I fire up a Linux VM it makes me feel a little guilty (after all, if everyone does what I'm doing there's essentially 0 reason for hardware providers to think about Linux drivers), but I've consigned myself to the fact that Linux's server roots are always going…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's opaque on Linux, but that's not the big problem. It's opaque on OS X and Windows as well, but nobody cares because it works . I wonder if we'll eventually get the kind of stability that we currently have with ethernet drivers... once the speeds are high enough that we stop upgrading, once the chips go into long-term production instead of changing every few years, once things settle down...
I disagree. It's possible to get advanced output from various command line tools in Linux, and it's possible to get networking information. It's much more difficult to do that on other OSs, especially Windows. I loathe debugging network troubles in Windows, because there is essentially no information. OS X has most of your standard tools, though some in some odd places, e.g., printing the routing table not being done…
dont worry, Lennart Poettering (systemD/pulseaudio) is working to solve this problem