Re: wpasupplicant for all wireless ops?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 03:34:59PM +0900, Glenn Saberton wrote:
>> Here's the patchset again against current netcfg. I haven't actually added
>> anything to the patchset since the last time I submitted it for consideration.
>> I intend on also using wpasupplicant for setting the wep key which in my eyes
>> simplifies things by removing the current wep function. We can also use it for
>> setting the essid for an open ap which would hopefully work around the issue
>> outlined below.
>
> Actually, the more I think of it, the more I think it would be the
> best way to go. And I think such change should be made quite early in
> the release cycle…
>
> Some personal rationale for pushing wpasupplicant for all use cases:
> * WPA wireless networks are more and more common these days. Recent
> applicances shipped by network providers now provide WPA by default
> in France. So if we want to allow WPA wireless networks to be used
> for netinsts, we have to include wpasupplicant in the initrd in any
> cases.
> * NetworkManager is used on most distros (and Debian as well) for
> desktop installations. NetworkManager always use wpasupplicant for
> interaction with wireless networks so now both wpasupplicant and the
> drivers have been quite tested.
>
> Getting rid of our custom code dealing with the wireless sounds to favor
> more commonly used software sounds like a desirable goal to me.
>
> What do other thinks?
>
> Glenn, I have a vague memory of you sending a patch that did that.
> I probably should apoligies on changing my mind about this now, but does
> this patch still apply?
I hadn't made a patch for using wpasupplicant for wep yet. I did try and
work around some of the issues that were mentioned in Frans original
mail. I wasn't very successful, which was why I much prefer to us the
supplicant for handling the subtleties in drivers.
>
> I am still willing to review Glenn's work, but I would rather only
> review the wpasupplicant way if others agree.
>
> Cheers,
Thanks
Glenn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAknlRNUACgkQV8GyuTwyskMrswCeMJ1w8r/RregElDpExzDcw+x5
m7kAnRlnlGR96Kg3zDjinoA4ZDY9lKWd
=MSVx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: