"new" Wireless tool for Ubuntu 6.10

[TheCotMan]

Ok. I'm strongly in favor of the CLI (command line interface) when using *NIX systems. Learning how to configure an interface with ifconfig/route/* in a CLI has often been easier than any GUI tool.

GUI tools often sucked, as they included parallel config files that would overwrite and custom mods to config files-- just by launching the GUI tools.

I've found a GUI tool for Ubuntu 6.10 that is really useful:
http://www.debianadmin.com/enable-wp...ntu-linux.html

This thing is pretty cool, but requires a bit of trust, as it suggests things like:
"Remove all of the interface configurations from /etc/network/interfaces except loopback."

However, the benefits are worth-while.

You get access to a GUI-toll with pull-down menu, that lets you switch from wired connection to wireless connection. Additionally, it shows you wireless AP in range by name, if they are open, or have some sort of restriction (WEP/WEP2/WPA) to access, *and* little bar-graphs showing signal strength to that wireless accesspoint. Additionally, when this icon/app is "docked" you can see present strength to associated Access Point.

This is like the ease of the Apple Network config tool, but with useful strength information at a glance.

But there is more! It seems that you might be able to make your own wireless network. (I have not tested this part out.)

Does use of this tool from a car make you a war-driver?

Very useful tool. Yay for Debian and Ubuntu.
Yay for the developer of this tool.

This PSA has been brought to you by the letter 'Y' , and the number DEC('A')

(It defaults to setting all wired connections to use DHCP, but these can be set as static by adding them back to /etc/network/interfaces.)

[Voltage Spike]

Re: "new" Wireless tool for Ubuntu 6.10

Ok. I'm strongly in favor of the CLI (command line interface) when using *NIX systems. Learning how to configure an interface with ifconfig/route/* in a CLI has often been easier than any GUI tool.

I'm not entirely sure about that. I believe that people perceive GUI tools as "intuitive". They perform their configuration by experimenting with the interface and seeing if it works. CLI tools, on the other hand, are less forgiving and force the user to read the manual (which often includes helpful advice and caveats) before proceeding.

Is there an inherent reason why a GUI tool, with many available widgets, should be inferior to a tool limited to simple free-form input?

GUI tools often sucked, as they included parallel config files that would overwrite and custom mods to config files-- just by launching the GUI tools.

I frequently hear that argument, but how true is it? I remember it being a problem with SUSE for a long time, but the tools by the Mandrake developers (it's obviously been a while since I used it) used only the files they were generating.

I've found a GUI tool for Ubuntu 6.10 that is really useful:
http://www.debianadmin.com/enable-wp...ntu-linux.html

Thanks for the tip. I'll have to check it out.

[DaKahuna]

Re: "new" Wireless tool for Ubuntu 6.10

Ok. I'm strongly in favor of the CLI (command line interface) when using *NIX systems. Learning how to configure an interface with ifconfig/route/* in a CLI has often been easier than any GUI tool.

GUI tools often sucked, as they included parallel config files that would overwrite and custom mods to config files-- just by launching the GUI tools.

I've found a GUI tool for Ubuntu 6.10 that is really useful:
http://www.debianadmin.com/enable-wp...ntu-linux.html

This thing is pretty cool, but requires a bit of trust, as it suggests things like:
"Remove all of the interface configurations from /etc/network/interfaces except loopback."

However, the benefits are worth-while.

You get access to a GUI-toll with pull-down menu, that lets you switch from wired connection to wireless connection. Additionally, it shows you wireless AP in range by name, if they are open, or have some sort of restriction (WEP/WEP2/WPA) to access, *and* little bar-graphs showing signal strength to that wireless accesspoint. Additionally, when this icon/app is "docked" you can see present strength to associated Access Point.

I am going to have to check this out. i current use Knetworkmanager which has very, very similar features. I especially like the fact that it prevents split tunneling by only allowing one network connection to be used at at time, yet does not prevent me from running kismet while using the wired connection.

[TheCotMan]

Re: "new" Wireless tool for Ubuntu 6.10

I'm not entirely sure about that. I believe that people perceive GUI tools as "intuitive". They perform their configuration by experimenting with the interface and seeing if it works. CLI tools, on the other hand, are less forgiving and force the user to read the manual (which often includes helpful advice and caveats) before proceeding.

Is there an inherent reason why a GUI tool, with many available widgets, should be inferior to a tool limited to simple free-form input?

Unfortunately, there is no resolution to arguements based on opinion. All I can do is to add more reasons for my opinions, but even this does nothing to provide a universal agreement at the end of an arguement.

Easier, example 1:
CLI: keyboard. type two lines of text. network done. If broken, ping, and telnet are there in the CLI. dig is also there.
GUI: mouse, click on menu, click on group, click on subgroup, locate application, clikc on application, click on tab for IP address, switch to keyboard, type in information, switch to mouse, click on next tab, or field, back to keyboard, back to mouse, back to keyboard, eventually, click OK or apply, and maybe you are done. Does your network work? Try clicking on a link to a URL. Does that work? Maybe it is DNS if not. Locate ping tool to check layer3, check gateway with some sort of GUI ping, check DNS availability with dig, or nslookup, back to gui ping.

CLI is easier for this. If go continue one step further, and consider text files, consider that text files can include comments. Most GUI Tools do not have comments. Also, text files allow for commenting out options, so that is is easy to revert to a previous setting just by commenting out the new line, and commenting-in the old one.

Having to switch between mouse and keyboard (as encouraged by the GUI, and considering the "novice users you mentioned, who would likely not know keyboard shortcuts) is a burden.

Perhaps the GUI is easier for you. "eh."

This overwriting of files happens with non-gui tools. Consider dhcpcd or dhclient, or that other one. They overwrite entries in /etc/resolv.conf by default. Rather annoying when you have a local static route through a tunnel using encryption to a "trusted" DNS and don't want to rely on the local DNS, and local LAN to local DNS for responses.

But again, there really is no resolution to arguements based on opinion.

I frequently hear that argument, but how true is it? I remember it being a problem with SUSE for a long time, but the tools by the Mandrake developers (it's obviously been a while since I used it) used only the files they were generating.

Yes, this is still a problem with some configuration tools. Want a good example? Play with many of the "/etc/" config files, and the GUI control-panels, then go join Chris with his opinions about Apple.

Run Mac OS X, and configure Netboot. Now go back and edit /etc/* files related to it. Hey, you get it working? Oh I'm sorry, someone ran one of the GUI-tools for Netboot to just LOOK at your settings, and now your changes to the file are gone. Thank you very much. Please drive through.

It still happens today. Just when it will happen, and what will be munged is not always known until after you try, but then it is too late.

[converge]

Re: "new" Wireless tool for Ubuntu 6.10

On the note of sprucing my laptop, I dist-upgraded to edgy. HOLY SHIT BATMAN.. dist-upgrade ACTUALLY WORKS in ubuntu without horrendously trashing any portion of your system.

Anyhow, installed wavemon for giggles to see how it would react to my module, its nifty on-off switch driven transmitter, and whatnot. Flipped on the Tx and the box instantly associated to MetroFi-Free ... citywide wireless has begun in Portland and started in my friggin neighborhood. Looks like they divy the pay-for version via access points, with a little more digging revealing a MetroFi-Premium ESSID. I also spied a 'belmont16' arch node that is being detected as a probe network.. interesting.

[Voltage Spike]

Re: "new" Wireless tool for Ubuntu 6.10

Unfortunately, there is no resolution to arguements based on opinion.

I wasn't really trying to provoke an argument. I was simply hoping you would add your thoughts as to why GUI tools suck, and, as expected, you performed admirably.

CLI: keyboard. type two lines of text. network done. If broken, ping, and telnet are there in the CLI. dig is also there.
GUI: mouse, click on menu, click on group, click on subgroup, locate application, clikc on application, click on tab for IP address, switch to keyboard, type in information, switch to mouse, click on next tab, or field, back to keyboard, back to mouse, back to keyboard, eventually, click OK or apply, and maybe you are done. Does your network work? Try clicking on a link to a URL. Does that work? Maybe it is DNS if not. Locate ping tool to check layer3, check gateway with some sort of GUI ping, check DNS availability with dig, or nslookup, back to gui ping.

While your example may be a bit stretched, I take your main point: when many options are available (such as ifconfig), GUIs are often faced with cluttering the interface or hiding the options in subcategories. Assuming you know the command, it's faster to simply type that option (and in any order you prefer, generally).

If go continue one step further, and consider text files, consider that text files can include comments. Most GUI Tools do not have comments.

Well, they do, but they are often available as mouse-over events. These often have the disadvantage of disappearing when you start typing and not being available unless you specifically request them.

Also, text files allow for commenting out options, so that is is easy to revert to a previous setting just by commenting out the new line, and commenting-in the old one.

Excellent point. I hadn't considered that, but I would miss that feature.

Having to switch between mouse and keyboard (as encouraged by the GUI, and considering the "novice users you mentioned, who would likely not know keyboard shortcuts) is a burden.

Unless you are fairly proficient at typing with one hand (due to frequent, simultaneous use of the mouse and keyboard), but, again, the novice isn't likely to be skilled in such a way.

Perhaps the GUI is easier for you.

I almost never use the GUI tools, but I always assume it is because I grew up in a world without them. I am used to the command line, and it is often my preferred environment (web browsing is one big exception). (Heck, I still use gnuplot even when I'm not looking for LaTeX output.) That doesn't mean I'm not open to the idea of improving interfaces, though...

Yes, this is still a problem with some configuration tools. Want a good example? Play with many of the "/etc/" config files, and the GUI control-panels, then go join Chris with his opinions about Apple.

While I see your point, aren't there command-line tools, and a whole set of text files, available for all of the Netboot environment? I always thought it more of a nicety that Mac OS X provided Linux-like files so that tools that read such files could be ported easily. I can see where this would be a very confusing concept for Linux users, though.

[TheCotMan]

Re: "new" Wireless tool for Ubuntu 6.10

I wasn't really trying to provoke an argument.

Sure you were. ;-)
I think we had this discussion before. If so, you are turning into an American-- and we know how much Americans like their reruns. (heh heh)

Well, they do, but they are often available as mouse-over events. These often have the disadvantage of disappearing when you start typing and not being available unless you specifically request them.

This is not necessarily the same thing. OS-"help-popups" are not the same thing as sysadmin comments. I've seen OS support "stickies" and I think I have even seen stickies configured to popup on certain conditions, but I've not seen such things available to all users on the system-- "sticky" comments follow the user. (This may have changed since I've played with them.)

I almost never use the GUI tools, but I always assume it is because I grew up in a world without them. I am used to the command line, and it is often my preferred environment (web browsing is one big exception). (Heck, I still use gnuplot even when I'm not looking for LaTeX output.) That doesn't mean I'm not open to the idea of improving interfaces, though...

So, here is your question back to you:
Do you use the CLI in most sysadmin-type things because it is easier for you?

While I see your point, aren't there command-line tools, and a whole set of text files, available for all of the Netboot environment?

For this class, I think the name associated with the class of tools related to the authentications and service setup with OS X Server is "NetInfo"
Yes, there are CLI tools for this, but they run risks similar to those frome the GUI when it comes to overwriting settings in config files. In some cases, edits to config files in OS X Server have no impact the how the OS behaves. And there are other config files that can be edited, but once edited, don't acytually works as expected, unless you synchonize those changes with netinfo-- as rebooting is sometimes not even enough to force a sync. (Additionally, in early version of Mac OS X Server, use of the GUI-config tools allowed for "live changes" to take effect right-away, but use of some of the CLI-sync tools required rebbots (with same options being set.)

There are things about OS X that suck, and this class of problems (lack of "normal" *NIX config file use for system administration, and extra work for synchronizing changes. I've nearly given up on considering OS X as a CLI-configurable OS. Since the job of a sysadmin is usually "uptime" and "reliability" , an OS Sysadmin must adapt to the new Apple tools for system administration more than they would with other *NIX systems.

SunOS (e.g. 4) wasn't too bad with this-- CLI edits of config files were encouraged. Debian Linux was actually pretty good with enforcing CLI/text-editor configuration of the /etc/files for default packages. (There were a few exceptions for "conveinience" like the dhcp clients, and other user-selectable add-on packages for things like "webmin" and, "swat" ( I think that was the name.) They were not exceptionally bad at breaking stuff, but they could really screw up config files by eliminating some more advanced settings.

Ubuntu is not as good as Debian, in this realm. It has more GUI tools that can overwrite config files. Usually, you get a warning, but it still happens on rare occasion. For a Desktop machine, Ubuntu's ease of use, and the, "we decided stuff for you," is actually a strong advantage to having an OS that can be installed and runs with little effort. I'd probably take Ubuntu as a Desktop, and Debian as a Server.

Of course *NIX servers are different. They are often configured over ssh in CLI at remote colos, or from home. Servers seem to be more commonly tuned, with things like "hdparam" special hardware options, and even custom kernels.

A summary of CLI vs. GUI:
A very skilled user, that undestands their tools and system configuration can often impose changes more quickly, with "#" comments to document their work, and still get things done more quickly than a skilled user with a GUI.
There are exceptions.
(Some examples.)
Selecting arbitrary files to move from one directory to another can be faster with a GUI-- especially, when there are no obvious patterns to their names, dates, or sizes. (Example: you want to copy MP3 audio files to a directory, so you can make an ISO, and you only want certain songs from certain albums in your compilation.)

This tool (topic of thread) is another one of those examples (in my view.) The time and effort to select CLI tools to scan for networks to associate with, specify the names, enter the WEP/WPA/* key/passphrase, and maybe even select the channel are actually greater than the time and effort necessary to view an automatically propagated list of nearby accesspoints, with relative signal strengths listed, along with a notice of which are open and which are not.

I'm not Anti-GUI, but I am not interested in GUI-tools that are more time consuming to use. (Time consuming, also includes future diagnostics, troubleshooting, and resolution of problems caused bye CLI/GUI config setting option saves.)

I always thought it more of a nicety that Mac OS X provided Linux-like files so that tools that read such files could be ported easily. I can see where this would be a very confusing concept for Linux users, though.

Such an effort might be useful, if the files were used in any reliable way. An amusing example comes (again) from NetBoot. When you installed it on the server, and enabled DHCP Server to give clients their netboot info, you might think that this would commit changes to the existing dhcp server config files. Nope. The NetBoot service has its own special dhcp server config listing. Yes, you guessed it, two different dhcp services served from the same interface, with risks for the wrong service responding to a client request. Yeah. The "Two Database" problem at a service level. They did eventually, "fix," this but I've harped on Apple enough for this post.

[Voltage Spike]

Re: "new" Wireless tool for Ubuntu 6.10

Sure you were. ;-)
I think we had this discussion before.

Hey, you fired the first shot this time. The discussion does seem familiar although I wasn't sure of the earlier context.

This is not necessarily the same thing. OS-"help-popups" are not the same thing as sysadmin comments.

I'm sorry. I misunderstood your point. I was thinking more along the lines of documented config files, such as slrn and mutt, that include "standard" documentation alongside each option.

So, here is your question back to you:
Do you use the CLI in most sysadmin-type things because it is easier for you?

I can't truly answer that question. I know one way of configuring things, and that way works for me. Could the GUI allow me to accomplish my goals faster or in an easier way? Maybe (although I doubt it) ... lack of experience forces me to plead ignorance.

For this class, I think the name associated with the class of tools related to the authentications and service setup with OS X Server is "NetInfo"

I knew Netboot didn't sound correct in the context I was using it, but I didn't take the time to look it up. Thanks for the lesson on how Apple somewhat screwed up the really complicated mess of tools that they created.

They are often configured over ssh in CLI at remote colos, or from home.

You can always tunnel X, but that isn't going to help with any of the apple stuff.

This tool (topic of thread) is another one of those examples (in my view.) The time and effort to select CLI tools to scan for networks to associate with, specify the names, enter the WEP/WPA/* key/passphrase, and maybe even select the channel are actually greater than the time and effort necessary to view an automatically propagated list of nearby accesspoints, with relative signal strengths listed, along with a notice of which are open and which are not.

Based on earlier discussions it sounds like scanning for networks is one step from being outlawed. Ignoring that little point, though, it sounds like the tool is a perfect candidate for a text user interface (such as mutt and slrn) ... but perhaps that just the minimalist in me.

[BonzoESC]

Re: "new" Wireless tool for Ubuntu 6.10

Unless you are fairly proficient at typing with one hand (due to frequent, simultaneous use of the mouse and keyboard), but, again, the novice isn't likely to be skilled in such a way.

From my understanding, most instances of typing with one hand come from frequent, simultaneous use of keyboard/mouse and joystick.