Quoting Andreas Henriksson (2019-02-03 23:12:37) > Control: severity -1 wishlist
Please reconsider the severity, because... > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 10:09:21PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > network-manager is compiled with support for iwd, > > but the package declares an absolute dependency on wpasupplicant. Above is the issue reported: I.e. the _possibility_ for using iwd as alternative. > Please note that from a "debian stable perspective" iwd should still > be considered "tech preview". Yes. Understood. But similar to our various X11 login managers not _depending_ on stable window managers but at most _recommending those, I beg for same here. > Having said all that, iwd should probably work well for most users. > (But at the same time I'd also recommend keeping wpasupplicant > installed for those cases where you do run into a situation where > you can't connect using iwd and has no other connectivity options > available.) It seems you - literally - agree that we should _recommend_ wpasupplicant. That is what this bug is about: Currently network-manager _depends_ on wpasupplicant which is wrong: In some exotic situations it makes sense to not install wpasupplicant, and network-manager _works_ without wpasupplicant, just less ideal. > > Please add iwd as alternative to wpasupplicant. > > In support of this statement, I'd like to think of potential drawbacks > and try to argue why they aren't problematic. In retrsospect I regret having mentioned above in this same bugreport. Because I agree that _encouraging_ the use of iwd is of severity wishlist and unsuitable for Buster. Please disregard, for the purpose of judging severity of this bugreport at least. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
