Wireless Network Key

[Mark Haney]

Chris Jones wrote:

> Your advice wasn't bad, just a last resort I would say...

Maybe.  As I said to your last post.  I'm much faster typing than 
pointing and licking.  The OP asked.  I offered.  He doesn't have to use 
it.  I still seemed to need to defend my logic stream on why I offered it.

> 
> It seems NM is one of these things were it works great for some (myself
> included) but others have perpetual issues with it. I know you aren't alone.
> 
> I suspect which camp you fall into depends to some degree on your
> hardware.

Possibly, but I've had people say it works for them with virtually 
identical hardware to what I was using.  At least NIC wise.

  I read somewhere once that a lot of the issues are, as far as
> the NM devs are concerned, bugs in the network drivers and not NM
> itself. The NM devs refuse to add hacks to their code to work around
> issues with specific drivers, and insist they are fixed at source, which
> takes time and in some cases the driver devs don't agree..

Sadly, this is true.  And part of the reason why I don't use NM.  I'm 
not happy with their attitude about adding in workarounds for funky 
drivers, when that is a simple bandaid that would make NM much more 
usable in the meantime and lead to more adoption by the community. (Not 
to mention, their code isn't all that great, if you ask me.)

> 
> I can understand this view point, but it doesn't help simple users stuck
> in the middle...
> 
> 

Agreed.  This is sadly the case of the devs trying to save us from 
ourselves and pointing the finger at someone else.  I don't CARE whose 
problem it is, I just want the problem fixed.  Even a work around is 
better than just letting work on a small subset of hardware because they 
claim those drivers are 'ok'.



-- 
Libenter homines id quod volunt credunt -- Caius Julius Caesar


Mark Haney
Sr. Systems Administrator
ERC Broadband
(828) 350-2415

Call (866) ERC-7110 for after hours support