On Monday 04 May 2009, John W. Linville wrote: > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 02:11:52PM -0400, Richard Farina wrote: > > Johannes Berg wrote: > >> Umm, if _you_ set channel 11 then you _will_ see channel 11. It's just > >> that when it's scanning and happens to be on channel 132 instead of 11, > >> while you previously set 11, you will _after_ this patch see 11, not > >> 132. > > > > Yes, and at what point does it seem like a good idea to hide the channel > > the wifi card is on? If I set channel 11 and it is scanning instead of > > locked on channel 11 then I should see the current channel the hardware > > is on. This seems like an aweful idea to me, granted, it may help a few > > people that don't understand how scanning works, but hiding the truth is > > never a good idea. NACK. > > I can see what you mean, but I think showing seemingly random > fluctuations in channel assignments is at best distracting. Don't you > agree that most people are more interested in seeing the configuration > state than the transient state of the hardware? I want to report my experience. There was a bug in the ath5k driver with a hanging result during scanning mode. I was able to discover the problem thanks to the iwconfig output. In alternative, is it possible to add a status flag so that iwconfig from user space can report scanning mode is operative? Fabio -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
