On Sat, 2009-05-30 at 00:33 +0200, Tobias Doerffel wrote: > > Could you try to work against v11 > > of my rfkill patch, or better even against the cfg80211 rfkill instead? > I didn't look at both of them yet. However I think we first should try to get > current rfkill support into mainline as fast as possible. Improvements and > adaptations to reworked rfkill framework can follow. No other comments from me -- but since the v11 of the rfkill rewrite will certainly hit the tree before your patch (it's almost in) you _will_ have to work against it. I'll also try to make the cfg80211 rfkill hit the tree very soon for reasons I'll explain elsewhere -- you would be better off working against that because then your rfkill code is very very very simple and doesn't need to do much at all. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
