On Wed 25 Mar 2020 at 08:22:33 (+0100), deloptes wrote: > David Wright wrote: > > > I don't want a desktop. In fact, wicd doesn't even need X, as it can > > run quite happily on a VC to configure a new AP. > > > > I did not tell you what you want. You just complained there is no interface.
I didn't *complain* that systemd-networkd hadn't got an interface—I just said that I needed one, which is why I've carried on using wicd. There are occasions when time is of the essence in configuring a wireless connection, which is why I consider it of overriding importance. > > When I return to somewhere I have been before, wicd (the daemon) > > usually connects before I have typed my passphrase to unlock /home. > > (That assumes I'm logging in.) > > I gave up on the Gnome spooks many years ago. But AFAIK wicd is the same or > similar as network-manager - well the GNome/GTK way of doing things. Sorry, I don't want a DE, I don't use one, and I don't know anything about the "Gnome way of doing things", so I'll refrain from commenting on how network-manager¹ does what it does. I thought we were discussing systemd-networkd, hence my quotation about it from the arch wiki. To be fair, I haven't tried to set up systemd-networkd for the reason given. Sometimes I've left machines as installed, with ifupdown running the show (not my laptops). Eventually, though, I usually end of installing wicd regardless, when I find I can't communicate with it remotely—wicd just seems better at bringing and keeping the networking up. ¹ I'll opine that its name is unfortunate—rather like inventing a currency and calling it "Currency" or "Money". Cheers, David.
