Hi Adrian,
On 25.03.2020 12:21, m...@adrianschmutzler.de wrote:
Hi Piotr,
-----Original Message-----
From: openwrt-devel [mailto:openwrt-devel-boun...@lists.openwrt.org]
On Behalf Of Piotr Dymacz
Sent: Mittwoch, 25. März 2020 00:34
To: openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
Subject: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] target.mk: enable iwinfo by default with
any wpad variant
[...]
Since you are touching this, maybe you can elaborate why this
extra_packages construct is needed at all?
I don't know exact reason and it was added long time ago, in 2014, see:
6435b8bb27e. I suppose that was the easy way to handle it back then?
Why can't we just add iwinfo as selective dependency to the wpad-/nas
packages as we do for all of the other packages?
Could you explain what you mean by 'selective dependency'?
I don't think DEPENDS is correct way to handle this. Do you mean use
'select iwinfo' in wpad/nas packages config?
I'm asking because I recently had a downstream case where we use
hostapd instead of wpad and wanted to get of iwinfo. I expected
iwinfo to go away because nothing selected it anymore, but in this
case it turned out that iwinfo is not automatically deselected, but
has to be removed manually as well.
I suppose you should first look at DEFAULT_PACKAGES and target.mk.
In most cases, wpad-* is added there and that's how iwinfo gets selected.
But I see the problem here, I'm just not sure if it's safe to change
current approach. Maybe Felix or Jo are able to explain reason for using
extra_packages.
--
Cheers,
Piotr
Best
Adrian
define ProfileDefault
NAME:=
--
2.20.1
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
