Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
Hello,

Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO? Isn't it widely accepted as
the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux? Is there any reason
for it not to be default?

Thanks

J

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
It's not *widely* accepted but just integrated with
GNOME. Though NetworkManager makes the
configuration of network an easier work, especially
when it comes to desktop use, some features like
network binding and monitor mode will be made
unavailable.

When it comes to ArchISO, wired network will be set up
automatically. If you use wireless network, tools like
wifi-menu and netctl are available, which has made
things much more easier. I'd suggest you read the
network configuration page on ArchWiki, which may
help you understand network configuration on Linux-
based operation systems better.



RW

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
To: [hidden email]
CC: Junayeed Ahnaf

Hello,

Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO? Isn't it widely accepted as
the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux? Is there any reason
for it not to be default?

Thanks

J

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO? Isn't it widely accepted as
> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux? Is there any reason
> for it not to be default?
>


Network manager actually limits users in that, when started, it plugs
its own configuration atop of whatever the user is doing manually.
Some features you might need are not supported like setting up a
bridge, too. Additionally, the wiki [0] lists quite a list of other
problems you might have from using it, so... what was the question?
Why the devs choose not to include it in the default distribution?

Read up on systemd-networkd [1], and if you need wifi, wpa_supplicant
[2], and tell us why you still think you want to force other people to
use a suboptimal solution so you don't have to figure out how simply
text based, system-wide configuration by the root user is better for
you... Did we not yet go into how nm needs to figure out in what ways
a user is allowed to configure a system's network and therefore
uses... policikit? Eww.

cheers!
mar77i

[0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/NetworkManager
[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd-networkd
[2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/WPA_supplicant
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

ITwrx.org
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?

Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
given install target.

> Isn't it widely accepted as
> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
not only for the desktop.

> Is there any reason
> for it not to be default?
The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies.  Also,
minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
desktop? I think it's rather high.


On 07/24/2017 01:30 PM, ITwrx.org wrote:

> On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
>> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?
> Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
> ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
> a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
> has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
> given install target.
>
>> Isn't it widely accepted as
>> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
> No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
> network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
> the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
> not only for the desktop.
>
>> Is there any reason
>> for it not to be default?
> The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
> less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies.  Also,
> minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
> and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
> Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
> might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
> your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

Bennett Piater


On July 24, 2017 9:36:39 AM GMT+02:00, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <[hidden email]> wrote:
>All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
>other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
>server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
>desktop? I think it's rather high.
You are missing the point. Many arch users don't simply install a desktop environment and use its defaults.
If that's what you want, you may want to use another distribution, preferably one that focuses on your DE.

I use a very minimal setup without DE, and I don't want bloated catch-all solution that doesn't integrate nicely into my configuration, thank you very much.

--
GPG fingerprint: 871F 1047 7DB3 DDED 5FC4 47B2 26C7 E577 EF96 7808
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
A general Arch installation is nothing but a minimal set
of GNU/Linux system with a package manager, which
can be configured into anything. I'm not going any
further for you have made yourself clear that you
haven't done your research. Offensive as it can be, I'd
say *RTFM*.

PS: It's apparently navie to say sth like Arch is nothing
but a desktop for archlinux.org itself runs on Arch Linux.


RW

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
To: [hidden email]
CC: Junayeed Ahnaf

All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
desktop? I think it's rather high.


On 07/24/2017 01:30 PM, ITwrx.org wrote:

> On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
>> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?
> Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
> ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
> a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
> has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
> given install target.
>
>> Isn't it widely accepted as
>> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
> No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
> network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
> the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
> not only for the desktop.
>
>> Is there any reason
>> for it not to be default?
> The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
> less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies.  Also,
> minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
> and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
> Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
> might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
> your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
2017-07-24 9:36 GMT+02:00 Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
<[hidden email]>:
> All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
> other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
> server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
> desktop? I think it's rather high.
I currently have 8 Arch machines, 5 of which are pure servers and 2
are server/desktop hybrids, one is an aging laptop which barely runs
anything with a GUI.
None have NM installed, most use Connman , the others 'just work' and
need nothing more than the basics already there.
I'm obviously not alone in finding Arch suitable for many purposes
other than a desktop machine, as indicated by other replies.

>
> On 07/24/2017 01:30 PM, ITwrx.org wrote:
>> On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
>>> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?
>> Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
>> ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
>> a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
>> has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
>> given install target.
>>
>>> Isn't it widely accepted as
>>> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
>> No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
>> network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
>> the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
>> not only for the desktop.
>>
>>> Is there any reason
>>> for it not to be default?
>> The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
>> less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies.  Also,
>> minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
>> and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
>> Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
>> might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
>> your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
I've installed ArchLinux on 3 desktops so far, and I've done them
successfully, so I must have *RTFM* , I was just wondering why is it
hard to configure wifi. Since I failed to configure wifi with
wpa_supplicant. I'll try with wifi-menu today, and report progress.


No need to be so aggressive man.


On 07/24/2017 01:48 PM, Robert Wong via arch-general wrote:

> A general Arch installation is nothing but a minimal set
> of GNU/Linux system with a package manager, which
> can be configured into anything. I'm not going any
> further for you have made yourself clear that you
> haven't done your research. Offensive as it can be, I'd
> say *RTFM*.
>
> PS: It's apparently navie to say sth like Arch is nothing
> but a desktop for archlinux.org itself runs on Arch Linux.
>
>
> RW
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
> From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
> To: [hidden email]
> CC: Junayeed Ahnaf
>
> All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
> other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
> server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
> desktop? I think it's rather high.
>
>
> On 07/24/2017 01:30 PM, ITwrx.org wrote:
>> On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
>>> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?
>> Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
>> ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
>> a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
>> has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
>> given install target.
>>
>>> Isn't it widely accepted as
>>> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
>> No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
>> network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
>> the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
>> not only for the desktop.
>>
>>> Is there any reason
>>> for it not to be default?
>> The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
>> less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies.  Also,
>> minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
>> and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
>> Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
>> might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
>> your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
On 24 July 2017 at 08:54, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I've installed ArchLinux on 3 desktops so far, and I've done them
> successfully, so I must have *RTFM* , I was just wondering why is it
> hard to configure wifi. Since I failed to configure wifi with
> wpa_supplicant. I'll try with wifi-menu today, and report progress.
>

I get where you're coming from: wpa_supplicant is powerful, but is not
particularly easy to set up manually, and I always used to groan when I had
to rely on Wifi in archiso. But wifi-menu takes all the pain away: it's
simple and straight-forward now.

Paul
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
It could also be useful to compare with:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dhcpcd

Considering minimalist focus of arch and use of systemd, maybe a more apt question would be: why does the installation collection include "dhcpcd"?

Do not confuse me for an expert, but I think the main answer is simply a practical one. The command is easy to type and the daemon does what it needs to with reliability.

Also, when defending, you should not introduce logical fallacies. Completing an installation is no proof that you've read the manual.

The Arch wiki is an incredibly thorough work with many, many pages. There's always more to learn. For example, have you got a dual boot working yet?

In my latest computer experiment, I instantiated Debian + Arch. This was no easy task because suggested loopback did not work with the Debian installation ISO. Even in this case, the wiki was good enough to get me most of the way to an independent solution. Thanks again wiki writers!

Cheers,

Brad


> On Jul 24, 2017, at 2:54 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I've installed ArchLinux on 3 desktops so far, and I've done them
> successfully, so I must have *RTFM* , I was just wondering why is it
> hard to configure wifi. Since I failed to configure wifi with
> wpa_supplicant. I'll try with wifi-menu today, and report progress.
>
>
> No need to be so aggressive man.
>
>
>> On 07/24/2017 01:48 PM, Robert Wong via arch-general wrote:
>> A general Arch installation is nothing but a minimal set
>> of GNU/Linux system with a package manager, which
>> can be configured into anything. I'm not going any
>> further for you have made yourself clear that you
>> haven't done your research. Offensive as it can be, I'd
>> say *RTFM*.
>>
>> PS: It's apparently navie to say sth like Arch is nothing
>> but a desktop for archlinux.org itself runs on Arch Linux.
>>
>>
>> RW
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
>> From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
>> To: [hidden email]
>> CC: Junayeed Ahnaf
>>
>> All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
>> other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
>> server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
>> desktop? I think it's rather high.
>>
>>
>>> On 07/24/2017 01:30 PM, ITwrx.org wrote:
>>>> On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
>>>> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?
>>> Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
>>> ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
>>> a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
>>> has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
>>> given install target.
>>>
>>>> Isn't it widely accepted as
>>>> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
>>> No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
>>> network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
>>> the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
>>> not only for the desktop.
>>>
>>>> Is there any reason
>>>> for it not to be default?
>>> The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
>>> less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies.  Also,
>>> minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
>>> and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
>>> Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
>>> might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
>>> your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

Ralf Mardorf-4
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
Hi,

my Arch install is a desktop computer connected to the Internet, but I
don't use NM and actually even Evolution (the GNOME MUA) is running.

I simply have two scripts, one based upon "modprobe -v pppoe; ip link
set", the other based upon "dhcpcd". Currently I use the latter.

I could copy those scripts to whatever Linux I want to use, to let what
ever init system is used, start those scripts.

One day I installed NM for testing purpose, it's still installed, but

[rocketmouse@archlinux ~]$ systemctl status NetworkManager.service
‚óŹ NetworkManager.service - Network Manager
   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/NetworkManager.service;
   disabled; [snip]
   ^^^^^^^^

NM is much to complicated for my taste. Why learning how to use rocket
science for a task, that actually could be done with a few idiotproof
steps instead?

I even didn't notice that for my minimal Ubuntu install NM is installed at
all

[root@archlinux rocketmouse]# systemd-nspawn -qD /mnt/moonstudio dpkg -l | grep network-m
ii  network-manager-dev:amd64            1.2.6-0ubuntu0.16.04.1                     amd64        network management framework (development files)
[root@archlinux rocketmouse]#

Ok, seemingly I needed the header files as a build dependency ;).

Regards,
Ralf
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
On 24 July 2017 at 07:30, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO? Isn't it widely accepted as
> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux? Is there any reason
> for it not to be default?

I would say that the reason NM is not on ArchISO is becaues in the
past it didn't have a simple enough support for a console UI,
which made it very useless in the ArchISO text-only envrionement.

Nowdays, with `nmtui` I'd say it would be ok to have it. NM has been
buggy in the past, but these days, it's a great tool.



--
damjan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

Jelle van der Waa-2
In reply to this post by Bennett Piater
On 07/24/17 at 09:40am, Bennett Piater wrote:

>
>
> On July 24, 2017 9:36:39 AM GMT+02:00, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
> >other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
> >server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
> >desktop? I think it's rather high.
> You are missing the point. Many arch users don't simply install a desktop environment and use its defaults.
> If that's what you want, you may want to use another distribution, preferably one that focuses on your DE.
>
> I use a very minimal setup without DE, and I don't want bloated catch-all solution that doesn't integrate nicely into my configuration, thank you very much.
Y'all seem to miss the point that provided on the ISO != installed
on your machine. I for one, don't see a problem with networkmanager
being installed on the ISO, nmtui works pretty well (as does nmcli), I'm
not sure however how much the ISO size will blow up.

--
Jelle van der Waa

signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
I thought I'd point out that, if the default image doesn't meet your needs,
you can always build your own <https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/archiso>
with the packages you want.

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 5:29 AM Jelle van der Waa <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 07/24/17 at 09:40am, Bennett Piater wrote:
> >
> >
> > On July 24, 2017 9:36:39 AM GMT+02:00, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
> > >other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
> > >server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
> > >desktop? I think it's rather high.
> > You are missing the point. Many arch users don't simply install a
> desktop environment and use its defaults.
> > If that's what you want, you may want to use another distribution,
> preferably one that focuses on your DE.
> >
> > I use a very minimal setup without DE, and I don't want bloated
> catch-all solution that doesn't integrate nicely into my configuration,
> thank you very much.
>
> Y'all seem to miss the point that provided on the ISO != installed
> on your machine. I for one, don't see a problem with networkmanager
> being installed on the ISO, nmtui works pretty well (as does nmcli), I'm
> not sure however how much the ISO size will blow up.
>
> --
> Jelle van der Waa
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Ryan Petris via arch-general
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> I thought I'd point out that, if the default image doesn't meet your needs,
> you can always build your own <https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/archiso>
> with the packages you want.
>


Are you asking those same users who aren't comfortable with
configuring wpa_supplicant to bake their own archiso? Lol.

cheers!
mar77i
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

Jude DaShiell-2
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
try the -o switch with wifi-menu is helpful and make sure you already have
the dialog package installed before you run wifi-menu.  On Mon, 24 Jul
2017, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:

> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 03:54:02
> From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <[hidden email]>
> To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: Junayeed Ahnaf <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
>
> I've installed ArchLinux on 3 desktops so far, and I've done them
> successfully, so I must have *RTFM* , I was just wondering why is it
> hard to configure wifi. Since I failed to configure wifi with
> wpa_supplicant. I'll try with wifi-menu today, and report progress.
>
>
> No need to be so aggressive man.
>
>
> On 07/24/2017 01:48 PM, Robert Wong via arch-general wrote:
>> A general Arch installation is nothing but a minimal set
>> of GNU/Linux system with a package manager, which
>> can be configured into anything. I'm not going any
>> further for you have made yourself clear that you
>> haven't done your research. Offensive as it can be, I'd
>> say *RTFM*.
>>
>> PS: It's apparently navie to say sth like Arch is nothing
>> but a desktop for archlinux.org itself runs on Arch Linux.
>>
>>
>> RW
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
>> From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
>> To: [hidden email]
>> CC: Junayeed Ahnaf
>>
>> All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
>> other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
>> server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
>> desktop? I think it's rather high.
>>
>>
>> On 07/24/2017 01:30 PM, ITwrx.org wrote:
>>> On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
>>>> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?
>>> Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
>>> ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
>>> a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
>>> has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
>>> given install target.
>>>
>>>> Isn't it widely accepted as
>>>> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
>>> No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
>>> network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
>>> the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
>>> not only for the desktop.
>>>
>>>> Is there any reason
>>>> for it not to be default?
>>> The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
>>> less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies.  Also,
>>> minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
>>> and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
>>> Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
>>> might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
>>> your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.
>
>

--
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
How can I install dialog when I don't have wifi?

Sent from BlueMail<http://www.bluemail.me/r?b=10066>
On Jul 24, 2017, at 5:17 PM, Jude DaShiell <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

try the -o switch with wifi-menu is helpful and make sure you already have
the dialog package installed before you run wifi-menu.  On Mon, 24 Jul
2017, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:

 Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 03:54:02
 From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <[hidden email]>
 To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
 Cc: Junayeed Ahnaf <[hidden email]>
 Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

 I've installed ArchLinux on 3 desktops so far, and I've done them
 successfully, so I must have *RTFM* , I was just wondering why is it
 hard to configure wifi. Since I failed to configure wifi with
 wpa_supplicant. I'll try with wifi-menu today, and report progress.


 No need to be so aggressive man.


 On 07/24/2017 01:48 PM, Robert Wong via arch-general wrote:
 A general Arch installation is nothing but a minimal set
 of GNU/Linux system with a package manager, which
 can be configured into anything. I'm not going any
 further for you have made yourself clear that you
 haven't done your research. Offensive as it can be, I'd
 say *RTFM*.

 PS: It's apparently navie to say sth like Arch is nothing
 but a desktop for archlinux.org<http://archlinux.org> itself runs on Arch Linux.


 RW

 -------- Original Message --------
 Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
 From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
 To: [hidden email]
 CC: Junayeed Ahnaf

 All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
 other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
 server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
 desktop? I think it's rather high.


 On 07/24/2017 01:30 PM, ITwrx.org<http://ITwrx.org> wrote:
 On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
 Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?
 Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
 ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
 a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
 has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
 given install target.

 Isn't it widely accepted as
 the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
 No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
 network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
 the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
 not only for the desktop.

 Is there any reason
 for it not to be default?
 The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
 less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies.  Also,
 minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
 and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
 Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
 might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
 your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

arch general mailing list-2
On 07/24/2017 02:21 PM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
> How can I install dialog when I don't have wifi?
ArchIso has preinstalled the 'dialog' package.  Is there an error when
you give the 'wifi-menu' command?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO

Jude DaShiell-2
In reply to this post by arch general mailing list-2
A temporary ethernet connection in another location likely will work
with sufficient download privileges.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:

> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 07:21:49
> From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <[hidden email]>
> To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: Junayeed Ahnaf <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
>
> How can I install dialog when I don't have wifi?
>
> Sent from BlueMail<http://www.bluemail.me/r?b=10066>
> On Jul 24, 2017, at 5:17 PM, Jude DaShiell <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
> try the -o switch with wifi-menu is helpful and make sure you already have
> the dialog package installed before you run wifi-menu.  On Mon, 24 Jul
> 2017, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
>
> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 03:54:02
> From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <[hidden email]>
> To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: Junayeed Ahnaf <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
>
> I've installed ArchLinux on 3 desktops so far, and I've done them
> successfully, so I must have *RTFM* , I was just wondering why is it
> hard to configure wifi. Since I failed to configure wifi with
> wpa_supplicant. I'll try with wifi-menu today, and report progress.
>
>
> No need to be so aggressive man.
>
>
> On 07/24/2017 01:48 PM, Robert Wong via arch-general wrote:
> A general Arch installation is nothing but a minimal set
> of GNU/Linux system with a package manager, which
> can be configured into anything. I'm not going any
> further for you have made yourself clear that you
> haven't done your research. Offensive as it can be, I'd
> say *RTFM*.
>
> PS: It's apparently navie to say sth like Arch is nothing
> but a desktop for archlinux.org<http://archlinux.org> itself runs on Arch Linux.
>
>
> RW
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
> From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
> To: [hidden email]
> CC: Junayeed Ahnaf
>
> All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
> other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
> server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
> desktop? I think it's rather high.
>
>
> On 07/24/2017 01:30 PM, ITwrx.org<http://ITwrx.org> wrote:
> On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?
> Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
> ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
> a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
> has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
> given install target.
>
> Isn't it widely accepted as
> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
> No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
> network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
> the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
> not only for the desktop.
>
> Is there any reason
> for it not to be default?
> The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
> less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies.  Also,
> minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
> and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
> Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
> might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
> your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.
>
>

--
12
Loading...