Charles Lopes wrote:
David Woodhouse wrote:
That's nice. I assume it selects the appropriate key based on the ESSID
it finds?
A while ago I sent patches to Bill (and/or put them in Bugzilla) which
added Bluetooth networking support. I moved the tail end of ifup into
ifup-eth, then added an 'ifup-wireless' which calls that, as does
ifup-bnep. We no longer have to have the wireless (or bluetooth) stuff
hacked in to the middle of ifup that way.
Splitting out ethernet stuff to ifup-eth sounds like a good idea IMHO.
I'm trying to add support for WAN cards (only using the generic hdlc
stack and sethdlc at the moment) and I was considering doing the same.
The ethernet code is already framed by a "if" statement anyway,
splitting it out would just improve readability and consistancy of the
ifup/down scripts.
Doubtless this has already been thought of and discarded but I just
wanted to make the comment that there may be lots of stuff on peoples
machines that depends on ifup. I know I have written scripts and lots of
other stuff over the years that used this script. So if we're going to
make changes to support wireless better then why not leave ifup alone
and call the wireless script "wifup"?
--
Chuck Mead <csm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Instructor II (and resident Postfix bigot), GLS
Disclaimer: "It's Thursday and my name is Locutus of B0rk!"
Addendum: "Bwahahaha! Fire up the orbital mind-control lasers!"
