Modestas Vainius wrote:
2006 m. birelis 13 d., antradienis 15:05, ju-s rae.te:
I will try to work on that. It was planned but difficult to implement
cleanly.
Great.
I did hint to the manpage, I think . . . Help is always welcome too :-)
Yeah, you did. Just noticed while zgrep'ing :-) But it was mentioned in the
_last_ sentence of the section "wpa_supplicant as system daemon" which I
didn't bother to read up to the end. IMHO, you should at least rename the
section to "Available roaming solutions" or something similar. Moreover, it's
not obvious that "wpa_supplicant as system daemon" documents something new. I
thought it was about going back (i.e. using init script, which I didn't
like), so just skipped it.
Btw, IMHO, wpa_action really deserves an entry in NEWS.Debian. It is NEW and
prefered, isn't it? :-)
Well, there is quite a story to its appearance in the debian sid archive.
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-wpa-devel/2006-June/000496.html
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-wpa-devel/2006-June/000507.html
As you can see, this was never intended for unstable, but we are not
going back, we will roll with the punches.
Furthermore, I think only I have used wpa_action so far, and have not
received comment from anyone else (I did announce it though).
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-wpa-devel/2006-May/000467.html
Maybe its best to "pimp" it when the this bug is fixed, its a bit of a
show stopper!
Kel.
