On Jul 8, 2014, at 5:39 AM, Tomasz Bursztyka <tomasz.burszt...@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> Thanks Grant for the reply. The config option sounds right to me as a >> general solution. Connman folks, thoughts? > > I don't think we will ever put this PassPhrase property back again. > And we don't do #ifdef here and there for small configurable parts. > > Too few real use cases, which could be themselves be solved out of ConnMan.
Tomasz, Thanks for the reply. As a clarification, this wasn't proposed as an preprocessor conditional. The proposal at hand is for a connman.conf/main.conf runtime configuration option, defaulting to disabled. There are ample examples of using the configuration file for such things today. As for use cases, I believe Drew and I have just presented a very real world and credible use case. This use case, when measured in shipping unit volumes that likely continues to make it one of the largest single (and possibly aggregate) connman implementations, is all the more real world. What alternative proposals would you suggest that provide similar functionality and utility in a manner that do not rely on side-channel approaches leveraging unofficial, unsupported implementation internals of connman? Best, Grant _______________________________________________ connman mailing list connman@connman.net https://lists.connman.net/mailman/listinfo/connman
