Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #240450 > unrolled thread

Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop computer

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop  computer <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-09-27 17:00 +0200
    Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop  computer David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-09-27 17:40 +0200
      Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop  computer Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> - 2021-09-27 19:10 +0200
        Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop  computer Stella Ashburne <rewefie@gmx.com> - 2021-09-27 21:10 +0200
          Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop  computer Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> - 2021-09-27 22:50 +0200
            Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop  computer <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-09-28 09:50 +0200
              buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an  old laptop) computer Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> - 2021-09-28 15:10 +0200
                Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on  an old laptop) computer Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-09-28 15:20 +0200
                  Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface  on an old laptop) computer Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> - 2021-09-28 16:20 +0200
                Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface  on an old laptop) computer <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-09-28 16:20 +0200
                  Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on  an old laptop) computer Cindy Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> - 2021-09-28 16:40 +0200
                    Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface  on an old laptop) computer <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-09-28 17:30 +0200
                    Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface  on an old laptop) computer Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-10-02 09:30 +0200
                  Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface  on an old laptop) computer Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-09-28 20:20 +0200
                    Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface  on an old laptop) computer Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-09-28 21:00 +0200
                      Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface  on an old laptop) computer Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-09-28 21:30 +0200
                      Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface  on an old laptop) computer <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-09-29 08:50 +0200
                        Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on  an old laptop) computer Markus Schönhaber <debian-user@list-post.mks-mail.de> - 2021-09-29 09:40 +0200
                Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on  an old laptop) computer Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2021-09-29 06:10 +0200
            Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop  computer Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-09-28 11:40 +0200
              Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop computer Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2021-09-28 14:40 +0200
      Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop  computer Stella Ashburne <rewefie@gmx.com> - 2021-09-27 21:10 +0200
    Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop  computer Stella Ashburne <rewefie@gmx.com> - 2021-09-27 21:10 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#240450 — Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop computer

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:43:44PM +0200, Stella Ashburne wrote:
> I have a dual-boot OS configuration on my HDD: Debian 11 and Microsoft Windows 10.
> 
> My CPU belongs to Intel 4th generation (Haswell) and I even installed packages such as firmware-misc-nonfree firmware-iwlwifi firmware-realtek
> 
> Microsoft Windows 10 is able to detect and makes use of the wireless chipset on my computer's motherboard.
> 
> However, Debian 11 is unable to detect it (wireless chipset). I only installed the bare minimum lxqt-core and lightdm packages (no fanciful stuff).
> 
> I issued the command:
> 
> ip link show
> 
> and there is not a line that says something like wlan or wl01 etc...
> 
> Below is the output of lspci:
> 

[...]

> 07:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation Wireless 3160 (rev 83)

This one looks like it might be your friend. AFAIK the firmware for that
is in the firmware-iwlwifi package.

What does `lsmod | grep iwl' say?

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#240454

On Mon 27 Sep 2021 at 16:52:03 (+0200), tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:43:44PM +0200, Stella Ashburne wrote:
> > I have a dual-boot OS configuration on my HDD: Debian 11 and Microsoft Windows 10.
> > 
> > My CPU belongs to Intel 4th generation (Haswell) and I even installed packages such as firmware-misc-nonfree firmware-iwlwifi firmware-realtek
> > 
> > Microsoft Windows 10 is able to detect and makes use of the wireless chipset on my computer's motherboard.
> > 
> > However, Debian 11 is unable to detect it (wireless chipset). I only installed the bare minimum lxqt-core and lightdm packages (no fanciful stuff).
> > 
> > I issued the command:
> > 
> > ip link show
> > 
> > and there is not a line that says something like wlan or wl01 etc...
> > 
> > Below is the output of lspci:
> > 
> 
> [...]
> 
> > 07:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation Wireless 3160 (rev 83)
> 
> This one looks like it might be your friend. AFAIK the firmware for that
> is in the firmware-iwlwifi package.
> 
> What does `lsmod | grep iwl' say?

And also any output from:

# dmesg | grep iwl

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240455

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 10:30:06AM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Mon 27 Sep 2021 at 16:52:03 (+0200), tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:43:44PM +0200, Stella Ashburne wrote:
> > > I have a dual-boot OS configuration on my HDD: Debian 11 and Microsoft Windows 10.
> > > 
> > > My CPU belongs to Intel 4th generation (Haswell) and I even installed packages such as firmware-misc-nonfree firmware-iwlwifi firmware-realtek
> > > 
> > > Microsoft Windows 10 is able to detect and makes use of the wireless chipset on my computer's motherboard.
> > > 
> > > However, Debian 11 is unable to detect it (wireless chipset). I only installed the bare minimum lxqt-core and lightdm packages (no fanciful stuff).
> > > 
> > > I issued the command:
> > > 
> > > ip link show
> > > 
> > > and there is not a line that says something like wlan or wl01 etc...
> > > 
> > > Below is the output of lspci:
> > > 
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > 07:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation Wireless 3160 (rev 83)
> > 
> > This one looks like it might be your friend. AFAIK the firmware for that
> > is in the firmware-iwlwifi package.
> > 
> > What does `lsmod | grep iwl' say?
> 
> And also any output from:
> 
> # dmesg | grep iwl
> 



And after that device shows up nmcli can be very useful:
 nmcli device

will list your network devices

if it is not enabled - unless it it is physically switched off -
you can unblock it with

 nmcli radio wifi on

and to connect
 nmcli --ask dev wifi connect <your-network-ssid>

it will ask for your wpa password and by default will remember it.

-H


-- 
Henning Follmann           | hfollmann@itcfollmann.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240457

Hello Henning,

Thanks for your reply.

> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 at 1:09 AM
> From: "Henning Follmann" <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop computer
>
> And after that device shows up nmcli can be very useful:
>  nmcli device
>
> will list your network devices
>
> if it is not enabled - unless it it is physically switched off -
> you can unblock it with
>
>  nmcli radio wifi on
>
> and to connect
>  nmcli --ask dev wifi connect <your-network-ssid>
>
> it will ask for your wpa password and by default will remember it.

nmcli is from the package network-manager, yes? If it is, I'd prefer not to install it. Why? Many VPN providers/vendors recommend against using Network Manager to connect to OpenVPN servers because the former is buggy and leaks details about the user.

I just came to know that there is a much better wireless daemon called iwd. On the internet it's said that iwd performs better and faster than the tradition wpasupplicant. What's more iwd was conceptualized by someone at Intel.

If you do know how to make changes to the settings of iwd configuration files, I wish to seek your help. You see, I'd to learn how to make use of this wonderful new technology. I have googled the internet and most of them don't provide detailed tutorials on how to set up for a home user. Sure, for example on ArchLinux's wiki pages, there are tutorials on how to set EAP-TTLS etc. I don't even know what EAP-TTLS stands for.

Some of the links that I have surfed to are the following:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Iwd
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/477488/connect-to-wifi-from-command-line-on-linux-systems-through-the-iwd-wireless-dae
https://docs.voidlinux.org/config/network/iwd.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240463

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 09:01:32PM +0200, Stella Ashburne wrote:
> Hello Henning,
> 
> Thanks for your reply.
> 
[...]
> 
> nmcli is from the package network-manager, yes? If it is, I'd prefer not to install it. Why? Many VPN providers/vendors recommend against using Network Manager to connect to OpenVPN servers because the former is buggy and leaks details about the user.
>

Oh boy.

Yes, nmcli is the command line interface to the network-manager service.

"Many VPN providers" - that is so vague, I do not even know what to say to that.
However "many VPN provider" are full of $#!1 and mainly use FUD to sell their "service",
which in most cases will not provide you what you would expect.
If you use VPN services for privacy purposes, you will be discusted by some of these
provider's TOS. They basically collect and sell your connection data to data brokers
as much as your ISP they promise to protect you from. But I degress.

And N-M is not "buggy". It is IMO one of the better way for the general PC user
to manage their physical connections.
I however have never used it to set up openvpn or wireguard. I use both currently,
but will most likely phase out openvpn.


> I just came to know that there is a much better wireless daemon called iwd. On the internet it's said that iwd performs better and faster than the tradition wpasupplicant. What's more iwd was conceptualized by someone at Intel.

Never used iwd, can't comment.

> 
> If you do know how to make changes to the settings of iwd configuration files, I wish to seek your help. You see, I'd to learn how to make use of this wonderful new technology. I have googled the internet and most of them don't provide detailed tutorials on how to set up for a home user. Sure, for example on ArchLinux's wiki pages, there are tutorials on how to set EAP-TTLS etc. I don't even know what EAP-TTLS stands for.

Then it's  great that you can use it :P. Like M. Ali said: "I maybe do not know what I am talking about, but I am right!"

> 
> Some of the links that I have surfed to are the following:
> 
> https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Iwd
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/477488/connect-to-wifi-from-command-line-on-linux-systems-through-the-iwd-wireless-dae
> https://docs.voidlinux.org/config/network/iwd.html
> 

-H

-- 
Henning Follmann           | hfollmann@itcfollmann.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240468

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:47:07PM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:

[...]

> And N-M is not "buggy". [...]

Uh-huh.

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240475 — buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 09:41:22AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:47:07PM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > And N-M is not "buggy". [...]
> 
> Uh-huh.
> 

What a great argument!

But I play along.
Are there bugs filed against N-M? Yes there are!
Are there reasons why people have issues with N-M? You bet!

Up until Jessie N-M had a lot of issues and missing features, which led to
the bad reputation of N-M. Most of these issue stem from the
mis/not - understanding of ipc mechanisms, espescially with
wpasupplicant. This often resultet in some "hacked" setups when
(semi-)information from the internet resulted in unstable configurations,
leading to more inaccurate information, when those results where shared
online.

But since buster, if you trust the work and knowledge of the
package maintainers N-M results in reliable network configurations
when we are talking about a default desktop setup. Most issues here
are mainly related to propietary drivers from various chip
manufacturers and not an N-M issue.

My comment to the OP was basically on the nebulous source (most VPN Providers)
and the generalized categorization (N-M is buggy), which I disagree with.

-H


-- 
Henning Follmann           | hfollmann@itcfollmann.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240476 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 8:01 AM Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 09:41:22AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:47:07PM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > And N-M is not "buggy". [...]
> >
> > Uh-huh.
> >
>
> What a great argument!
>
> But I play along.
> Are there bugs filed against N-M? Yes there are!
> Are there reasons why people have issues with N-M? You bet!
>
> Up until Jessie N-M had a lot of issues and missing features, which led to
> ....
> But since buster, if you trust the work and knowledge of the
> package maintainers N-M results in reliable network configurations
> when we are talking about a default desktop setup. Most issues here
> are mainly related to propietary drivers from various chip
> manufacturers and not an N-M issue.
>

But please stress your comment "when we are talking about a default desktop
setup". In the non-desktop server environment, N-M is disabled. Indeed it
is a type of risk. Last times I've been on AWS and Google cloud, their VM
instances also remove N-M. Same reason.
In these environments wifi does not exist, so network connections should be
known ahead of time, and a fixed set.

My comment to the OP was basically on the nebulous source (most VPN
> Providers)
> and the generalized categorization (N-M is buggy), which I disagree with.
>

That is not the view that I have heard expressed.
N-M is a 1-size-fits-all approach to network setup that only fits 1
use-case. But we all get to have it :-)
Some developers would call it "over engineered". That I agree with.

-H
>
>
> --
> Henning Follmann           | hfollmann@itcfollmann.com
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240477 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 08:14:40AM -0500, Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 8:01 AM Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 09:41:22AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:47:07PM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > And N-M is not "buggy". [...]
> > >
> > > Uh-huh.
> > >
> >
> > What a great argument!
> >
> > But I play along.
> > Are there bugs filed against N-M? Yes there are!
> > Are there reasons why people have issues with N-M? You bet!
> >
> > Up until Jessie N-M had a lot of issues and missing features, which led to
> > ....
> > But since buster, if you trust the work and knowledge of the
> > package maintainers N-M results in reliable network configurations
> > when we are talking about a default desktop setup. Most issues here
> > are mainly related to propietary drivers from various chip
> > manufacturers and not an N-M issue.
> >
> 
> But please stress your comment "when we are talking about a default desktop
> setup". In the non-desktop server environment, N-M is disabled. Indeed it
> is a type of risk. Last times I've been on AWS and Google cloud, their VM
> instances also remove N-M. Same reason.
> In these environments wifi does not exist, so network connections should be
> known ahead of time, and a fixed set.

That is fair! And I guess this maybe plays into your argument too,
but I think (not sure though) even if you install debian without
DE, N-M  still is installed.
But I agree this is not necessary. Complexity baaad. Simplicity good!
:)

> 
> My comment to the OP was basically on the nebulous source (most VPN
> > Providers)
> > and the generalized categorization (N-M is buggy), which I disagree with.
> >
> 
> That is not the view that I have heard expressed.
> N-M is a 1-size-fits-all approach to network setup that only fits 1
> use-case. But we all get to have it :-)
> Some developers would call it "over engineered". That I agree with.
> 
> -H
> >
> >
> > --
> > Henning Follmann           | hfollmann@itcfollmann.com
> >
> >

-- 
Henning Follmann           | hfollmann@itcfollmann.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240478 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 09:00:47AM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 09:41:22AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:47:07PM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > And N-M is not "buggy". [...]
> > 
> > Uh-huh.
> 
> What a great argument!

I don't care very much about N-M. It's not the kind of software I
enjoy. Too complex for my taste. De gustibus...

But this wasn't my point. My point was rather that it is going out
on a thin limb to say a complex piece of software isn't "buggy".

> But I play along.
> Are there bugs filed against N-M? Yes there are!
> Are there reasons why people have issues with N-M? You bet!
> 
> Up until Jessie N-M had a lot of issues and missing features, which led to
> the bad reputation of N-M. Most of these issue stem from the
> mis/not - understanding of ipc mechanisms, espescially with
> wpasupplicant [...]

My short spat with N-M is *much* older. I wasn't aware of it until
once, at a customer's premises (I had a wired connection into the
customer's net) N-M saw a WiFi "out there" (it turned out to be
one of those captive portals) and thought "oh, let's set the default
route /that/ way"). N-M went out of the window and never ever went
in again. But that's me.

[...]

> My comment to the OP was basically on the nebulous source (most VPN Providers)
> and the generalized categorization (N-M is buggy), which I disagree with.

Fair enough.

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240479 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

On 9/28/21, tomas@tuxteam.de <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 09:00:47AM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 09:41:22AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:47:07PM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:
>> >
>> > [...]
>> >
>> > > And N-M is not "buggy". [...]
>> >
>> > Uh-huh.
>>
>> What a great argument!
>
> I don't care very much about N-M. It's not the kind of software I
> enjoy. Too complex for my taste. De gustibus...


I started to chime in last night, but my brain took a vacation. Maybe
the "complex" was what happened to me, too.

Last night I was only going to say "nm" didn't used to (and may still
not) play nice with similar packages installed on the same machine. It
was an either/or situation. I took the "or" with wicd then wicd-curses
and have never looked back. That's with hardwires, though. I haven't
had an excuse to spend time duking it out with attaching wireless.

What fried my brain last night was on trying to remember if nm had
been too "complicated" and thus not user-friendly for *me*. I still
see other people rave about it. That's cool. At the end of the day, it
means our brains function (comprehend) differently, but we all seem to
be arriving at the same place: Connected to whatever it is we need to
use. That's where the beauty of Debian offering CHOICE comes into
play.

Cindy :)
-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA
* runs with birdseed *

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240484 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 10:28:49AM -0400, Cindy Sue Causey wrote:

[...]

> What fried my brain last night was on trying to remember if nm had
> been too "complicated" and thus not user-friendly for *me*. I still
> see other people rave about it. That's cool.

Definitely.

> At the end of the day, it
> means our brains function (comprehend) differently, but we all seem to
> be arriving at the same place: Connected to whatever it is we need to
> use. That's where the beauty of Debian offering CHOICE comes into
> play.

That's why I love Debian.

Cheers

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240778 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Ma, 28 sep 21, 10:28:49, Cindy Sue Causey wrote:
> On 9/28/21, tomas@tuxteam.de <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 09:00:47AM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 09:41:22AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:47:07PM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote:
> >> >
> >> > [...]
> >> >
> >> > > And N-M is not "buggy". [...]
> >> >
> >> > Uh-huh.
> >>
> >> What a great argument!
> >
> > I don't care very much about N-M. It's not the kind of software I
> > enjoy. Too complex for my taste. De gustibus...
> 
> 
> I started to chime in last night, but my brain took a vacation. Maybe
> the "complex" was what happened to me, too.
> 
> Last night I was only going to say "nm" didn't used to (and may still
> not) play nice with similar packages installed on the same machine. It
> was an either/or situation. I took the "or" with wicd then wicd-curses
> and have never looked back.

With me it was the other way around. I tried wicd, mostly based on the 
bad reputation of Network Manager, but it was unreliable when switching 
between wired and wireless.

Eventually I switched to Network Manager and never had any significant 
problem since.

This was on unstable, somewhere around the release of wheezy, and I 
would frequently switch the laptop between wired and wireless.

> That's with hardwires, though. I haven't
> had an excuse to spend time duking it out with attaching wireless.

Wouldn't bother with a "heavy" manager for wired only. ifupdown and more 
recently systemd-networkd is more than enough.
 
> What fried my brain last night was on trying to remember if nm had
> been too "complicated" and thus not user-friendly for *me*. I still
> see other people rave about it. That's cool. At the end of the day, it
> means our brains function (comprehend) differently, but we all seem to
> be arriving at the same place: Connected to whatever it is we need to
> use. That's where the beauty of Debian offering CHOICE comes into
> play.

For me it's just a piece of software that does what I need it to do.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240501 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 16:12:21 +0200
<tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:

>..
> 
> But this wasn't my point. My point was rather that it is going out
> on a thin limb to say a complex piece of software isn't "buggy".
> 
It's a matter of degree. All software has bugs, even if you haven't
seen them yet.

But only some software can be fairly described as 'buggy'. I have no
hesitation at all in declaring most of libreoffice to fall into this
category, with Base still virtually unusable i.e. extremely buggy. Calc
isn't too bad. Volume of users, I suppose, but Base will never gain
many users in its present state.

Claws-Mail verges on 'buggy', with frequent crashes. Firefox on my
unstable has blown through buggy and burst out of the other side. I can
only name two commercial websites which do not crash its tabs within
about thirty seconds. And that's after reinstalling it and all its
dependencies. I haven't bothered reporting it because I'm obviously the
only person seeing this. I blame JavaScript, as I do with most web
infelicities.

But my unstable desktop, including hardware, is in its last weeks of
life, so I'm not putting too much effort into fixing things. A new
installation should fix a multitude of sins.

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240506 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

On Tue 28 Sep 2021 at 19:12:27 +0100, Joe wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 16:12:21 +0200
> <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
> 
> >..
> > 
> > But this wasn't my point. My point was rather that it is going out
> > on a thin limb to say a complex piece of software isn't "buggy".
> > 
> It's a matter of degree. All software has bugs, even if you haven't
> seen them yet.

Never a truer word. This is the "keep them on tenterhools" style of
support.
 
> But only some software can be fairly described as 'buggy'. I have no
> hesitation at all in declaring most of libreoffice to fall into this
> category, with Base still virtually unusable i.e. extremely buggy. Calc
> isn't too bad. Volume of users, I suppose, but Base will never gain
> many users in its present state.

I have never used libreoffice. You have succeeded in persuading me never
to install it.
 
> Claws-Mail verges on 'buggy', with frequent crashes. Firefox on my
> unstable has blown through buggy and burst out of the other side. I can
> only name two commercial websites which do not crash its tabs within
> about thirty seconds. And that's after reinstalling it and all its
> dependencies. I haven't bothered reporting it because I'm obviously the
> only person seeing this. I blame JavaScript, as I do with most web
> infelicities.

The one machine here with Claws-Mail has *never* seen a crash due to
it (or anything else, for that matter). What am I doing wrong?

Firefox? Works. Well.
 
> But my unstable desktop, including hardware, is in its last weeks of
> life, so I'm not putting too much effort into fixing things. A new
> installation should fix a multitude of sins.

New installation? Another sid? That should make a difference.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240508 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 19:52:19 +0100
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Tue 28 Sep 2021 at 19:12:27 +0100, Joe wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 16:12:21 +0200
> > <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
> >   
> > >..
> > > 
> > > But this wasn't my point. My point was rather that it is going out
> > > on a thin limb to say a complex piece of software isn't "buggy".
> > >   
> > It's a matter of degree. All software has bugs, even if you haven't
> > seen them yet.  
> 
> Never a truer word. This is the "keep them on tenterhools" style of
> support.
>  
> > But only some software can be fairly described as 'buggy'. I have no
> > hesitation at all in declaring most of libreoffice to fall into this
> > category, with Base still virtually unusable i.e. extremely buggy.
> > Calc isn't too bad. Volume of users, I suppose, but Base will never
> > gain many users in its present state.  
> 
> I have never used libreoffice. You have succeeded in persuading me
> never to install it.

I didn't say it wasn't useful. I use Calc quite heavily, Draw and
Writer occasionally. I have tried hard to use Base, it would be
excellent for quick-and-dirty interfaces...if it worked. As it is, for
Q&D I tend to use phpmyedit, or php itself for something more
permanent. I still miss MS Access, by far the best bit of software they
ever made.
>  
> > Claws-Mail verges on 'buggy', with frequent crashes. Firefox on my
> > unstable has blown through buggy and burst out of the other side. I
> > can only name two commercial websites which do not crash its tabs
> > within about thirty seconds. And that's after reinstalling it and
> > all its dependencies. I haven't bothered reporting it because I'm
> > obviously the only person seeing this. I blame JavaScript, as I do
> > with most web infelicities.  
> 
> The one machine here with Claws-Mail has *never* seen a crash due to
> it (or anything else, for that matter). What am I doing wrong?

Not running unstable? Not running a very old unstable?
> 
> Firefox? Works. Well.

As it does on my other Linux machines. And Windows, for that matter.
The problem is some part of my unstable environment.
>  
> > But my unstable desktop, including hardware, is in its last weeks of
> > life, so I'm not putting too much effort into fixing things. A new
> > installation should fix a multitude of sins.  
> 
> New installation? Another sid? That should make a difference.
> 
I would have thought so. A new installation should be different in a
great many small ways, as an upgraded system will never be identical
to a new one installed using the same software. This one, as far as I
can tell, has been in continuous use for between twelve and fifteen
years, which I reckon to be a good age for an OS instance. Thanks to
Debian for making it even possible.

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240536 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 07:52:19PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Tue 28 Sep 2021 at 19:12:27 +0100, Joe wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 16:12:21 +0200
> > <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:

> > > [... no software isn't buggy...]

> > It's a matter of degree. All software has bugs, even if you haven't
> > seen them yet.
> 
> Never a truer word. This is the "keep them on tenterhools" style of
> support.

Another often forgotten dimension is perception. Your buggy software
might be my sweet spot and vice versa.

Bug is, as they say, in the eye of the beholder :)

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240539 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

29.09.21, 08:48 +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de:

> Another often forgotten dimension is perception. Your buggy software
> might be my sweet spot and vice versa.
> 
> Bug is, as they say, in the eye of the beholder :)

https://xkcd.com/1172/

-- 
Regards
   mks

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240533 — Re: buggy N-M (was: Debian 11: Unable to detect wireless interface on an old laptop) computer

This isn't really a good place to chip in, but the best I can find from 
the messages I haven't deleted ...

On 29/09/21 2:00 am, Henning Follmann wrote:
> My comment to the OP was basically on the nebulous source (most VPN Providers)
> and the generalized categorization (N-M is buggy), which I disagree with.

My own problems with NM, which may be related, seem to be shared with 
many in the 'OpenVPN community'.

It seems that for configuring OpenVPN, NM does its own thing, and mostly 
ignores the 'standard' configuration files etc. that are covered by the 
OpenVPN documentation. Even some of the terminology seems to be different.

That makes it very difficult to match up the changes I might make on my 
server to those that are needed on the (NM-managed) client. I had it 
working on my buster laptop, but with a reinstall of bullseye, combined 
with some changed defaults in the OpenVPN setup, I ended up giving up - 
I now start my VPN with systemctl rather than clicking through NM. I 
should probably write a script rather than trying to remember how vpns 
map to systemctl unit targets (?), but I don't use it very often, and 
have moved on ...

I feel the NM maintainers could do more to talk to the OpenVPN folks, 
and maybe provide some tools to import standard configs, or generate 
something that NM can consume? Maybe vice-versa too. I don't know where 
those responsibilities lie.

Cheers,
Richard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240471

On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 16:47:07 -0400
Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 09:01:32PM +0200, Stella Ashburne wrote:
> > Hello Henning,
> > 
> > Thanks for your reply.
> >   
> [...]
> > 
> > nmcli is from the package network-manager, yes? If it is, I'd
> > prefer not to install it. Why? Many VPN providers/vendors recommend
> > against using Network Manager to connect to OpenVPN servers because
> > the former is buggy and leaks details about the user. 
> 
There was an early period when N-M was known as 'Notwork Manager', but
that was long ago.
> 
> And N-M is not "buggy". It is IMO one of the better way for the
> general PC user to manage their physical connections.
> I however have never used it to set up openvpn or wireguard. I use
> both currently, but will most likely phase out openvpn.
>

I've used it for some years with OpenVPN, but with my own server, not
some random commercial thing. I run it on both my mobile computers as a
matter of course (it also handles wifi pretty well) but would never
consider it on a desktop. It's a Gnome application, but I just hold my
nose and use a large enough hard drive. It doesn't actually have many
Gnome dependencies
>
> >  Sure, for example on
> > ArchLinux's wiki pages, there are tutorials on how to set EAP-TTLS
> > etc. I don't even know what EAP-TTLS stands for.  

ArchLinux docs are pretty good, even for standard Debian.

See if you can wade through some of the basics of FreeRADIUS. It has
extensive documentation of a range of auth technologies. e.g. EAP-TLS
('extended authentication protocol') is the basic certificate-based
auth where the client must supply a certificate. I believe the 'TTLS'
version does not require a client certificate, so I've never looked at
it. Pretty much all the MS authentications are explained (CHAP, PAP,
etc.)

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web