No, it should be disabled by default based on the fact most people do not need this "rfkill" what even upstream has been disabling, and it would be only enabled for those two utils out of the several thousand out there, anyhow.
I am just repeating myself as the same is questioned again, again, and again. ... or you really think that "rfkill" is needed for the majority use cases out there? On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer < rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote: > On 29 July 2013 14:20:05 Laszlo Papp <lp...@kde.org> wrote: > >> Oh, it is actually also in danny. I was looking into the "files" >> directory, >> but it is in the other. >> >> It is definitely not in denzil though. >> > > Perhaps disable it only in the layer that pulls in these pre-2.6.31 kernel > headers? > > Thanks, > > >> >> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Laszlo Papp <lp...@kde.org> wrote: >> >> > Only _one_, not two. >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Phil Blundell <p...@pbcl.net> wrote: >> > >> >> On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 11:22 +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote: >> >> > I disagree. This change should not have gone in the first place >> >> > causing the regression for the users. Please be consistent with the >> >> > history. >> >> >> >> If this was a recent change then I would have some (limited) amount of >> >> sympathy for your position. But the commit you are complaining about >> >> has been in the tree for over a year, and it was presumably included in >> >> at least one if not two of the most recent stable releases. >> >> >> >> p. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > > > Sent with AquaMail for Android > http://www.aqua-mail.com > > >
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
