No Network Connection available

[Adys]

I am evaluating Salix 13.37 x32 as guest in VirtualBox. My intention is to eventually install it to real hardware.

Booting the VM with the Salix 13.37 x32 Xfce LIVE ISO, I am able to click on Salix Online icon (in the LIVE desktop) and I am connected.

After installing Salix with the Basic set of Software selection in the VM, I have no Network Connection when booting the installed Salix 13.37 Xfce VM. I keep searching for the relevant info in the wiki / faq / startup guide with no success.

I can provide more info, but I'd rather first know which specific info you would need to know, instead of writing "everything I can think of".

Can anyone please point me in the right direction?

TIA.

[Akuna]

Are you using wifi? if so what card?

[Adys]

No wifi. My host is connected with a wired cable modem (and the computer is connected to the cable modem using Ethernet), and then I have to use a VPN to connect to my ISP (it is the standard method here, even for home personal users as myself).

In any case, remember that when booting the VM with the LIVE CD I *am* able to connect, (since my host is already connected; and I'm not doing anything special to achieve the connection in the LIVE VM - I'm just connected) but rebooting the same VM with the already installed Salix, I wasn't able to find out what should I do to get the connection.

I have read the wiki pages, but unfortunately it is not clear to me what should I do / configure so to get connected.

Any help is appreciated.

TIA.

[Shador]

The basic option really installs a basic system. That means no network manager or wireless network software is installed which might not be needed/wanted by someone chosing a basic system intended to be customizable.

However the standard installer gives you the option to configure your wired network with the dialog-based netconfig through some Slackware startup scripts. That option is as of now still missing with the Live installer when doing a basic or core installation.

So you have two options now:

1. run netconfig from cli as root to setup your wired network or whatever else is needed with the standard Slackware tools for your network
2. install a network manager like wicd

Regarding 2 you either do 1 first and then install wicd over the internet, you grab the package and its dependencies and install them manually or you add the standard edition as package source to your package manager.


BTW this network "issue" with basic has been covered many times on this forum.

[Adys]

Something is not clear to me from your post.

When I follow the Start up guide, after installing the Basic Software selection I am supposed to update the system (for example with security updates) and then add programs / packages according to my needs.

The Basic Software selection includes (at least, that's what I understood from the wiki, from the Start up Guide and from the LIVE Installer itself) the required utilities so to accomplish this, including a web browser and package manager (among others). But, if I understood your post correctly, the Basic selection does not include any way to actually connect to any repository. So what would be the point of adding a web browser (for example) in the Basic Software selection?

Moreover, if I am supposed to add packages so to be able to connect, how could I add those packages (from the LIVE CD, for example)?

The most notable info is that, whichever the method / tools / packages / configuration I am supposed to use according to my connection characteristics, the LIVE environment itself has no issues at all, but the Basic installation has them . So which item / tool / package / whatever is there already available and working in the LIVE environment, but it is not available in the Basic installation? Is there any wiki page or step by step instructions available (which I was not yet able to find)? I have already read about Wicd in the wiki / FAQs before opening this topic, but the steps described there are not matching what I found in the Basic installation.

I mean, if the packages are there in the LIVE CD, shouldn't be there some way to add them to the already installed system, from the CD as "repository"?

Can someone please post some links to those previous forum topics / FAQs / How-tos / Wiki pages where this issue was already presented / discussed / resolved?

TIA.

[Shador]

But, if I understood your post correctly, the Basic selection does not include any way to actually connect to any repository. So what would be the point of adding a web browser (for example) in the Basic Software selection?

No, that's wrong. It just doesn't include stuff needed for wireless network and wicd has been removed. You can still use the Slackware rc.inet method, which can be setup using netconfig. Apart from that it's of course also possible to connect manually.
So there's very well a point for a browser.

It's just a bit harder with the Live installer for a basic installation because it does not offer you to run netconfig. But you can still do it manually.

The most notable info is that, whichever the method / tools / packages / configuration I am supposed to use according to my connection characteristics, the LIVE environment itself has no issues at all, but the Basic installation has them

Yes, the LiveCD is a FULL environment. So everything from a full installation is included in the Live environment. In a basic installation that's obviously not the case. The basic installation is also targeted more at advanced users, that know how to setup their network e.g. using native Slackware scripts. As I said an actual network manager like wicd is not included for choice! It's not at all needed for desktop computers with wired network and even for wireless there are other solutions than network managers. So the removal of wicd is a fully intentional feature and no problem at all with certain skill!

So which item / tool / package / whatever is there already available and working in the LIVE environment, but it is not available in the Basic installation?

wicd and all wireless stuff (wireless-tools, firmware, ...)

I mean, if the packages are there in the LIVE CD, shouldn't be there some way to add them to the already installed system, from the CD as "repository"?

Unfortunately that's not possible with a LiveCD. Either the LiveCD would be loading terribly slow because it needs to load every single package by itself or everything would need to be included twice (once as live module, one as package) which is not possible due to space constraints and not feasible either.
With the installer image exactly this is possible. That CD can be used as a repository.

On the other hand with the LiveCD you already have a full environment at your reach, which you could use to download packages if necessary, rescue your system, ....

Moreover, if I am supposed to add packages so to be able to connect, how could I add those packages (from the LIVE CD, for example)?

Just run netconfig. Seriously, I've been mentioning this before and if this is too hard for you basic might just not be the right thing for you. It's certainly hard to start with basic if only wireless network access is available.

Apart from that I can only quote myself:

So you have two options now:

1. run netconfig from cli as root to setup your wired network or whatever else is needed with the standard Slackware tools for your network
2. install a network manager like wicd

Regarding 2 you either do 1 first and then install wicd over the internet, you grab the package and its dependencies and install them manually or you add the standard edition as package source to your package manager.

And actually I'm sure there are in fact many more options.

Is there any wiki page or step by step instructions available (which I was not yet able to find)?

Not that I know of and there will never be for anything. In any case I already told you multiple times to run netconfig for wired networking and wireless networking is out of your scope unless you install a network manager like wicd.

[Adys]

Apologies for this long post, but I need to back up my following comments with logical explanations.

I may need to clarify my previous comments.

The reason I mentioned wicd is because you mentioned it, and because it is the only wiki page related to this type of issue I was able to find before opening this topic.

With your first comments about netconfig I found several forum topics, but each has its own particularities. Since the wiki pages and the Start up guide already include so many basic comments and more than 50 FAQs, I would have though that something so common (but not necessarily basic) would be at least mentioned in those pages. A step by step wiki about netconfig would be very useful too (not for everyone, but for many users that could potentially handle CLI but that don't have an idea about "some netconfig" command or about what a Network Connection Manager is).

(Please take these comments as feedback and not at all as complaints.) As mentioned in many of those topics with "network connection" questions, the Basic Installation seems a little odd, whether it is from the LIVE Installer or from the "normal" (to call it somehow) installer. Let me explain my point of view.

The Core selection is clearly for advanced and experienced users. The Full Software selection seems more closer to an "out-of-the-box-ready" situation for less experienced users. Now, the Basic software selection should be different from both, Core and Full selections, in the sense of the target type of users.

I don't consider myself a *complete* newbie, but I'm not advanced either. If the netconfig step was at least mentioned somewhere in the wiki in relation to the Basic software selection, then my guess is that less topics would had been opened about the Network Connection after a Basic install. After all, simpler items are mentioned in the start up Guide regarding the Basic software selection, so it doesn't seem out of range to add information about how to achieve a network connection, before going to the "updating and package manager" steps. Of course, it would be even better not to request / expect from the intermediate user to achieve this goal by himself. (Once the intermediate user gains more experience, he would be able to do it by himself and to use the Core software selection).

Now, I understand how to run a CLI as root, so this is not about having to use GUI tools exclusively, as a "truly ready-out-of-the-box-for-newbies" behavior / situation. So the conflict is not about GUI / CLI, but about the info that the user ( *I* ) need to provide to such command (or to an easy-to-use GUI tool; doesn't matter). For example, I have no idea where to find the host and domain info that netconfig is requesting from me. (Any hints about this would be very welcome. Since the LIVE system is automatically capable of connecting, does the LIVE system could help me find this info?).

About the web browser (among others) being useful for the Basic software selection, it is still odd (from the user's point of view). I mean that setting the network connection and/or adding packages from sources or running scripts are all things that require more knowledge than adding a web browser from repositories after the network connection is established.

IMHO, having more hardware support and the ability to resolve technical situations (like configuring the network connection) is more important than having more GUI programs in the Basic selection (I would even take out big office-related packages so to gain space for the LIVE system, but that's another topic). A user that is capable and knowledgeable to manually configure the network connection would be able to resolve the addition of, for example, a web browser. In that sense, the Basic software selection should cover a wide range of users between the most experienced ones (capable of installing Core and continue from that point on) and the most newbie ones that need all sorted out "automatically".

So, could someone point me in the right direction where to find "my domain" and "my host" for netconfig? (Maybe by booting the VM from the LIVE CD?) Whichever info I can provide (for example about my host OS or about my hardware or my ISP) so eventually I could find the required info, please let me know.

TIA.

[Shador]

The Full Software selection seems more closer to an "out-of-the-box-ready" situation for less experienced users.

Actually both are targeted at advanced users. They're just intended for different setups. Basic is more like a core for desktop system users that want a highly-customizable setup, but don't want to go through core.

Now, the Basic software selection should be different from both, Core and Full selections, in the sense of the target type of users.

Why? They should have a different target, that's right, but not necessarily a different target type of users.

If the netconfig step was at least mentioned somewhere in the wiki in relation to the Basic software selection, then my guess is that less topics would had been opened about the Network Connection after a Basic install.

This point is probably missing in the documentation because it's a problem with the Live installer. With the standard installation netconfig is invoked during setup.

Once the intermediate user gains more experience, he would be able to do it by himself and to use the Core software selection

Do you feel Salix is an educational game? With increasing levels where each level allows to solve the next one?
That's not the intention of the different package selections. They're meant to provide a starting point for different use cases:

1. Core: headless systems like servers, anything special
2. Basic: custom application selection
3. Full: just get me going

IMHO, having more hardware support and the ability to resolve technical situations (like configuring the network connection)

How many machines are desktop machines? How many desktop machines have wireless chips? How many of those desktops with wireless actually use it? Do they need wireless drivers?

I would even take out big office-related packages so to gain space for the LIVE system, but that's another topic

You wouldn't gain any space, unless you also remove that software from the full selection.

About the web browser (among others) being useful for the Basic software selection, it is still odd (from the user's point of view). I mean that setting the network connection and/or adding packages from sources or running scripts are all things that require more knowledge than adding a web browser from repositories after the network connection is established.

You're not getting the point. First of all for a user with a Slackware background, it's not at all difficult. And apart from that the problem is entirely the Live installer here! With the standard edition the network setup is part of the setup (like bootloader, locale, ...) unless the full edition with a network manager is installed.

the most newbie ones that need all sorted out "automatically"

Basic is not intended for newbies. You need a fair understanding and experience with linux to be able to select your applications yourself. That's not the case for newbies.

For example, I have no idea where to find the host and domain info that netconfig is requesting from me. (Any hints about this would be very welcome. Since the LIVE system is automatically capable of connecting, does the LIVE system could help me find this info?).

No chance finding that information anywhere. That's like parents asking where they could find that name of their newborn child when asked to pick a name.
With the Live edition it's set to some sane, temporary default. But once you're doing a normal setup it makes sense to pick a name for the machine, called hostname. The domain is the group of computers this machine is part of. This should be a domain, you own as in google.com. But usually just 'localdomain' is fine. The resulting name of your computer is accordingly "myname" or "myname.localdomain".
I'm just wondering how you managed to run installers in the past. After all even Windows asks you to choose hostname and domain/workgroup/whatever.
You can change those values anytime using the Hostname tool in the menu.

And here's the Slackware documentation about netconfig and networking: http://www.slackbook.org/html/book.html ... FIGURATION

[Adys]

Thank you for your reply.

We have a problem of miscommunication.

The Full Software selection seems more closer to an "out-of-the-box-ready" situation for less experienced users.

Actually both are targeted at advanced users. They're just intended for different setups. Basic is more like a core for desktop system users that want a highly-customizable setup, but don't want to go through core.

Salix is not for 100% newbies IMHO. I am using relative terms. Still, your own answer there is exactly my point about the Basic software selection. According to your own description, currently there is not much difference between the Core and the Basic selections, in terms of the user that would choose one or the other. Once you offer the Basic software selection option, by improving the network connection "issue" (partly by additional documentation and partly by additional features installed under "Basic") you are in fact targeting a wider range of middle users. Typical examples are the ones in those topics about similar network connections like this one. In fact I found similar suggestions already and even a positive response about such suggestions (although, evidently still not implemented).

Now, the Basic software selection should be different from both, Core and Full selections, in the sense of the target type of users.

Why? They should have a different target, that's right, but not necessarily a different target type of users.

There could be users interested and capable of using more than one type of software selection, but, again, by improving network connection features in the Basic software selection, there is an additional range of users that could be able to install Salix. Currently, the answer for this wide group of users is either reinstall using Full (and the user already had that chance before and for some reason he actually wanted the Basic selection), or don't install Salix. You are basically saying that, in terms of user knowledge that would install Salix, Core and Basic are almost the same. Maybe not the same use to the final system, but it is still "skipping" the middle range user. This may not be the intention, but when looking at this from the user's side...

If the netconfig step was at least mentioned somewhere in the wiki in relation to the Basic software selection, then my guess is that less topics would had been opened about the Network Connection after a Basic install.

This point is probably missing in the documentation because it's a problem with the Live installer. With the standard installation netconfig is invoked during setup.

You are missing one of my points / suggestions. One level of user needs the documentation to follow the instructions. He doesn't know which tool (either GUI or CLI) he needs to run so to achieve the final goal: network connection. In the case of the standard installer, the steps indeed request the same information as the "manual" netconfig. But the user needs to know what to answer. There is a wide range of users that, when given the appropriate direction, will be able to find the relevant information and then answer to the steps (whether during the standard installer or by netconfig) correctly. Under the Basic selection, there is a range of users that could easily be incorporated to potential users of Salix, but currently are forced to different options (either Full software selection or not installing Salix).

Once the intermediate user gains more experience, he would be able to do it by himself and to use the Core software selection

Do you feel Salix is an educational game? With increasing levels where each level allows to solve the next one?
That's not the intention of the different package selections. They're meant to provide a starting point for different use cases:

1. Core: headless systems like servers, anything special
2. Basic: custom application selection
3. Full: just get me going

And once again, the users choosing Core or Basic selection are almost the same under the current Basic selection. By improving the Network Connection features available in Basic by default, the range of users would be much wider. To avoid confusions, I indeed understand that the features are there. But by making them more easily available, the impact should be notable. To give you an example of the opposite, having a web browser installed by default in Basic, in the current situation, has almost no impact on the range of users that would choose Basic during the install (meaning, currently the same user would choose Basic anyway, whether you have a web browser already included or not).

While you are talking about "use cases", I am talking about "useR cases". They are of course related, but not the same. By improving both the documentation about network connection and easier availability of the features in Basic software selection, the previous "use cases" are still there, but now you would be adding more "use cases" and more "useR cases".

IMHO, having more hardware support and the ability to resolve technical situations (like configuring the network connection)

How many machines are desktop machines? How many desktop machines have wireless chips? How many of those desktops with wireless actually use it? Do they need wireless drivers?

I don't know how many. Currently, there is not enough documentation about these cases (with similar forum topics opened about this same issue, and probably users that didn't take the time to post the question and got disappointed) and, again, this particular feature, network connection, is too important for users to be ignored. If you find that a web browser installed by default is important in Basic, then I would tend to think that making network connection features as easy as possible for more users is even more important. Independently of how many different cases, as with any other hardware support, the more and easier the better from the user's point of view.

I'm not saying that "every single" feature must be st_pid proof. I'm saying that this specific feature, connectivity, involves so many technical details and is so important to any user, that anything that facilitates it means a huge difference.

I would even take out big office-related packages so to gain space for the LIVE system, but that's another topic

You wouldn't gain any space, unless you also remove that software from the full selection.

Yes, that's what I mean. But I only mentioned this because of the comment about the available space in one LIVE CD. This is OT here, unless you would want to hear possibilities / opinions of items to exclude from the LIVE CD so to gain space in favor of network connection "easy of use" features, in case “space” in the CD is the main problem.

About the web browser (among others) being useful for the Basic software selection, it is still odd (from the user's point of view). I mean that setting the network connection and/or adding packages from sources or running scripts are all things that require more knowledge than adding a web browser from repositories after the network connection is established.

You're not getting the point. First of all for a user with a Slackware background, it's not at all difficult. And apart from that the problem is entirely the Live installer here! With the standard edition the network setup is part of the setup (like bootloader, locale, ...) unless the full edition with a network manager is installed.

And once again, I am talking about a wider range of users, not just the same that could already use Core software selection and start from there anyway to obtain the same result.

And again, whether it is the standard installer, or the live installer, there is a range of users that needs a little more info. More documentation about network connection would mean easier installation for more users that are currently not covered. Easier network connection features in Basic software selection means even a wider range of users that would be interested in using the Basic software selection.

the most newbie ones that need all sorted out "automatically"

Basic is not intended for newbies. You need a fair understanding and experience with linux to be able to select your applications yourself. That's not the case for newbies.

Yes, Basic is not for newbies. That's why Basic is not "all sorted out automatically". That's what I said. Under the current situation, Less knowledge -> Full install. Much more knowledge -> Core or Basic are available. Middle knowledge -> either use Full, even if it is not what you are interested in, or go search something else.

But if the network connection in Basic could be made easier and more documented, more middle-knowledge users would be able to use Basic, with less forum topics opened about this issue.

For example, I have no idea where to find the host and domain info that netconfig is requesting from me. (Any hints about this would be very welcome. Since the LIVE system is automatically capable of connecting, does the LIVE system could help me find this info?).

No chance finding that information anywhere. That's like parents asking where they could find that name of their newborn child when asked to pick a name.
With the Live edition it's set to some sane, temporary default. But once you're doing a normal setup it makes sense to pick a name for the machine, called hostname. The domain is the group of computers this machine is part of. This should be a domain, you own as in google.com. But usually just 'localdomain' is fine. The resulting name of your computer is accordingly "myname" or "myname.localdomain".
I'm just wondering how you managed to run installers in the past. After all even Windows asks you to choose hostname and domain/workgroup/whatever.
You can change those values anytime using the Hostname tool in the menu.

All that should be part of the documentation. It is not a coincidence that there are several forum topics about network connection after a Basic software selection installation. The default hostname (desktar?) could be mentioned in the (currently nonexistent) network connection docs too. That info seems trivial to more experienced users, but it sounds like old Latin (or Chinese, or...) for others that, otherwise, could perfectly use Basic as a valid installation method.

You mentioned Windows. Well, IIRC, the domain is not obligatory, depending on the Windows version (I mean for the user to type "something") under a Windows home desktop system. But Salix installer won't continue with typing "something". The text in the installer could be clearer here. And after the "hostname" ("computer name that the user would like") and "domain" ("in many cases, not important so the user could use 'localdomain' as default"), the user would need to know / understand several decisions. Of course newbies don't know what dhcp or loopback mean. But many middle-knowledge users won't either. During the Basic software selection installation, the network connection is the only step that has no alternative other than deeper knowledge. whether the user used the LIVE installer or the standard one is irrelevant in this regard.

For a middle-knowledge user, the network connection jargon might be even scary, specially without clear documentation about it. OTOH, the same user would be able to install a web browser and apply critical updates by following the current documentation, if not for the lack of the network connection. For the middle-knowledge user trying to use the Basic software selection installation, this may very well be a deal breaker.

And here's the Slackware documentation about netconfig and networking: http://www.slackbook.org/html/book.html ... FIGURATION

Good. If such links and more documentation and explanation would be added to the Salix Wiki and Start up Guide, the jargon would be less scary too. And if the network connection features in Basic would work easier for the final user, then that would be much, much better yet.

BTW, I eventually got it working for the VM, and I also installed more packages successfully (the latter was not a problem at all). The documentation for the other tasks, and the features already included, are useful for middle-knowledge users (yet there is potential for improvements and i will eventually post comments about them in respective topics). The only steps that really gave me troubles (while testing both, the LIVE installer and the standard one, both using Basic software selection) were the ones about network connection. I still need to investigate how to configure it in my real hardware, with the cable modem and the VPN (which is the way the ISP works here).

Even if, at least for now, my problem is solved, the bigger picture about the Basic software installation and repeated topics related to network connection should not be left without improvements, IMHO. I am open to discussion about it, if you are interested in a middle-knowledge user's point of view.

[thenktor]

That's not the intention of the different package selections. They're meant to provide a starting point for different use cases:

1. Core: headless systems like servers, anything special
2. Basic: custom application selection
3. Full: just get me going

Or even simpler:
* Full installation: always chose this one, unless...
* Core/Basic: you need some special system and know how to set up Slackware.