-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Somebody in the thread at some point said: | Andy Green wrote: |> Yeah I gathered that from the name ;-) But WLAN with RF down is a |> chocolate teapot, we don't have Monitor and you can't ACK. So it's OK |> to overload it as meaning "take WLAN down". | | The rfkill documentation quite strongly suggests that only a real | rfkill switch or controller should even think about using the rfkill | interface. So I'm not certain if a "pretend rfkill" implementation | would be all that welcome, even though it would be quite close in | terms of behaviour. I'll ask on the wireless list.
Sure we have to try to work with upstreams and not pointlessly do random things. But I'm not willing to cede all decisions about our product to each upstream sort of mindlessly like you are there. If it's useful and suits our needs to have an rfkill interface that happens to take down the whole device because that's what we've got to work with, we should just do that. - -Andy -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAklKs3YACgkQOjLpvpq7dMoeZQCfcQBEkxWQkjTWrFbFffkeyUxe /6kAn3ocQ1dWmJu3WwkoUYO1+1C7iBV6 =CK61 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
