Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:05, James Long wrote: Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 13:05:23 +0930 From: Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c The command I use most is wicontrol -L Try ifconfig ath0 list scan # ifconfig ath0 list scan ifconfig: list: bad value # Er weird.. Is this in 6.0 or 5.x? FreeBSD t21.museum.rain.com 5.4-STABLE FreeBSD 5.4-STABLE #0: Mon Oct 24 12:49:5 5 PDT 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/i386/compile/T21 i386 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c
On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 05:59, James Long wrote: # ifconfig ath0 list scan ifconfig: list: bad value # Er weird.. Is this in 6.0 or 5.x? FreeBSD t21.museum.rain.com 5.4-STABLE FreeBSD 5.4-STABLE #0: Mon Oct 24 12:49:5 5 PDT 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/i386/compile/T21 i386 Ahh that explains it.. Continue using wicontrol :) -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C pgpYoTNbR3iiy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 13:05:23 +0930 From: Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c The command I use most is wicontrol -L Try ifconfig ath0 list scan # ifconfig ath0 list scan ifconfig: list: bad value # ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:05, James Long wrote: Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 13:05:23 +0930 From: Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c The command I use most is wicontrol -L Try ifconfig ath0 list scan # ifconfig ath0 list scan ifconfig: list: bad value # Er weird.. Is this in 6.0 or 5.x? -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C pgpmnSJF40rkd.pgp Description: PGP signature
RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c
wicontrol.c defaults to the wi interface. I used to have a
wi device, but it eventually took a dump and I bought a new
ath-based card, which works flawlessly AFAIK, after four months
or so.
But I grow weary of having to specify -i ath0 every time I
run wicontrol.
Please review the following patch to /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c
which modifies wicontrol to look for an environment variable
WI_IFACE and if set, take the interface name from that variable.
If unset, the interface name defaults to wi0 just as before,
which hopefully will make this POLA compliant. Googling for
WI_IFACE I find no indications that this variable name already
is in use for anything else.
Apologies in advance for the simple diff output patch.
Jim
t21 : 15:13:58 /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol# diff wicontrol.c.orig wicontrol.c
1092c1092,1094
iface = wi0;
---
if ((iface = getenv(WI_IFACE)) == NULL) {
iface = wi0;
}
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 03:20:47PM -0700, James Long wrote: wicontrol.c defaults to the wi interface. I used to have a wi device, but it eventually took a dump and I bought a new ath-based card, which works flawlessly AFAIK, after four months or so. But I grow weary of having to specify -i ath0 every time I run wicontrol. Please review the following patch to /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c which modifies wicontrol to look for an environment variable WI_IFACE and if set, take the interface name from that variable. If unset, the interface name defaults to wi0 just as before, which hopefully will make this POLA compliant. Googling for WI_IFACE I find no indications that this variable name already is in use for anything else. Apologies in advance for the simple diff output patch. wicontrol is obsolete and you should not need to use it, particularly for ath(4) devices. Why are you using it? Is some feature you need missing from ifconfig? -- Brooks -- Any statement of the form X is the one, true Y is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 pgpBDY3g7ydnF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c
wicontrol is obsolete and you should not need to use it, particularly for ath(4) devices. Why are you using it? Is some feature you need missing from ifconfig? The command I use most is wicontrol -L ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: proposed patch for /usr/src/usr.sbin/wicontrol/wicontrol.c
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:31, James Long wrote: wicontrol is obsolete and you should not need to use it, particularly for ath(4) devices. Why are you using it? Is some feature you need missing from ifconfig? The command I use most is wicontrol -L Try ifconfig ath0 list scan -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C pgpSE5NRXD8b9.pgp Description: PGP signature
