Hi, On Tue, 26 May 2020 13:10:27 +0200 Andreas Henriksson <andr...@fatal.se> wrote: > Just wanted to drop a comment about the iwd status in NM. > NM has since 1.24.0, which is now in testing/unstable, basic > support for connecting to a hidden network using the iwd backend. > > There are still many minor bugs remaining in the NM iwd backend > both for hidden and any other network. Examples that comes to mind: > - Removing a connection in NM doesn't seem to propagate > to iwd known-network list. > - NM and iwd sometimes gets out of sync for unknown reasons, > stopping iwd and restarting NetworkManager then browsing menues > to trigger dbus activation of iwd again can be used as a workaround. > - nmcli errors out on trying to scan (for a hidden network!) even when > specifying 'hidden yes' on the command line. (Working method to > provision a hidden network includes using the "Connect to hidden > network..." menu entry in gnome-control-center Wi-Fi pane.) > - and more... > > Many minor workaroundable issues that needs more polish. > Unfortunately it doesn't seem like anyone is working on improving > the NM iwd backend since quite a while now (except for my basic hidden > network contribution, which was a one-off for personal needs).
That sounds a bit like the iwd is only semi-maintained in NM which makes me a bit uncomfortable tbh. What also concerns me a bit is, that ttbomk we don't have an automatic fallback to iwd. Say I switch the dependency to wpasupplicant | iwd, wpasupplicant is removed. NM is not automatically using iwd without explicit configuration? Is that correct? Michael
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
