On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 09:29:56AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 00:07 +0100, Darren Salt wrote: > > I demand that Steve Langasek may or may not have written...
> > > On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 01:59:20PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote: > > [snip; ITP for rfkill] > > >> I'm choosing a git snapshot over 0.1 because it contains some > > >> functionality which will be of use in eeepc-acpi-scripts. > > > It's been proposed already to integrate this tool into the wireless-tools > > > package; you may want to check with the maintainer of said package (and > > > upstream) to sort out where this is best integrated. > > I'm not convinced that it should, given the current description of > > wireless-tools (for wext, basically); this would be broadening the scope of > > that package somewhat. It may as well be merged into bluetooth, AFAICS... > Or wimax tools, or 3G tools, or ... I agree with this, shipping it with > wireless tools doesn't really seem appropriate. It's really used most > for wifi and bluetooth, but the bluetooth stack now has its own rfkill > soft instance like the wifi stack too. FWIW, I'm still unclear why a special tool is needed to manage killswitches now, since it used to be possible to set these directly via the interfaces under /sys - the interfaces appear to still be there, but they no longer accept changing the values, requiring access via a control device under /dev instead. Surely this is a regression from the perspective of the kernel design? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
