[2012-10-16 10:41:09 -0500] Leonid Isaev: > I fully support having netcfg in base (and as a default network backend in > arch) because it is far better than the alternatives :) I don't think that > wpa_supplicant/crda belongs in base (for instance routers don't need > wpa_supplicant but may require hostapd), but iw (and iproute2) definitely has > to go there as it provides some hardware management capabilities. Since routers do not need netcfg any more than they do wpa_supplicant, with your reasoning, it should not be in base either... If we stick to the definition that the base group should contain everything needed too boot up a minimal system and connect it to the network, then I do not see how you can consider wpa_supplicant optional. -- Gaetan
Attachment:
pgp1oWaxO4WPi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
