[MM PATCH 1/2] novatel-lte: handle $NWQMISTATUS responses for firmware 4.08

2012-10-18 Thread Ben Chan
In firmware 4.08, the $NWQMISTATUS command returns different values for QMI state to indicate the current connection state. This patch modifies the code to handle $NWQMISTATUS responses in firmware 1.41 and 4.08. --- plugins/novatel/mm-broadband-bearer-novatel-lte.c | 24 +++- 1

[MM PATCH 2/2] novatel-lte: retry $NWQMISTATUS upon an unknown error during connecting

2012-10-18 Thread Ben Chan
The $NWQMISTATUS command sometimes replies an ERROR shortly after calling the $NWQMICONNECT command, but then replies the proper QMI status if we retry it. This behavior is observed on an E362 modem with 4.08 firmware. (ttyUSB0): --> 'AT$NWQMICONNECT=,,"",,,"",""' (ttyUSB0): <-- 'OK'

Re: [PATCH](or feature-request) build both systemd and ck versions

2012-10-18 Thread Colin Walters
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 05:19 -0400, Pavel Simerda wrote: > In my opinion, you should have just one binary. It is easy to detect systemd > at runtime, as it requires cgroups and creates one. There is sd_booted() as public API for that. For what NetworkManager is doing, runtime detection may indeed

Re: [PATCH](or feature-request) build both systemd and ck versions

2012-10-18 Thread Colin Walters
On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 15:02 -0400, Luke T.Shumaker wrote: > I propose that the build system should generage both > `NetworkManager-ck' and `NetworkManager-systemd' binaries and symlink > `NetworkManager' to one of them. > > This way a distro that supports both sysvinit and systemd (such as > Arch)

Re: [PATCH](or feature-request) build both systemd and ck versions

2012-10-18 Thread Luke T . Shumaker
At Thu, 18 Oct 2012 05:19:57 -0400 (EDT), Pavel Simerda wrote: > In my opinion, you should have just one binary. It is easy to detect systemd > at runtime, as it requires cgroups and creates one. Symlink management is > an overkill here. CK should be likewise very easy to detect. In absence of > bo

Re: __attribute__ ((cleanup) patch

2012-10-18 Thread Colin Walters
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 11:28 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > I don't consider this an experiment at this point. Well, I do think Pavel has a point; it's true that NetworkManager is an order of magnitude more code than any other project I've used it in before, and it's larger in terms of people too.

Re: __attribute__ ((cleanup) patch

2012-10-18 Thread Colin Walters
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 11:19 -0400, Pavel Simerda wrote: > I'm not yet even convinced about this because of total lack of documentation > to be > found right away. What do you think about this patch? Does it help address your concerns? Is there anything that could be clearer? >From a6f48a9720

Re: __attribute__ ((cleanup) patch

2012-10-18 Thread Dan Williams
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 11:56 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 11:51 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > > I don't oppose that. > > Attached. Well, *if* we did that, we'd just "git revert " instead of applying a patch to do it. Dan ___

Re: __attribute__ ((cleanup) patch

2012-10-18 Thread Dan Williams
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 11:19 -0400, Pavel Simerda wrote: > > From: "Colin Walters" > > Hi, > > Hi, thanks for a quick reply. > > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=685440 > > > > has a patch which just landed, but I wanted to give wider discussion > > to this, because it's a very impor

Re: __attribute__ ((cleanup) patch

2012-10-18 Thread Colin Walters
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 11:51 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > I don't oppose that. Attached. >From c43e095419423b36544e221f9f0896d2579fb0a0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Colin Walters Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:53:05 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Revert "core: import libgsystem, use it for local-allocat

Re: __attribute__ ((cleanup) patch

2012-10-18 Thread Dan Williams
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 10:19 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > Hi, > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=685440 > > has a patch which just landed, but I wanted to give wider discussion to > this, because it's a very important infrastructural change. > > First, one thing that came up is a con

Re: __attribute__ ((cleanup) patch

2012-10-18 Thread Colin Walters
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 11:19 -0400, Pavel Simerda wrote: > Then why it wasn't good enough for Glib but is good enough for > NetworkManager? Why See this thread: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2012-April/msg3.html Basically, because the GTK+ stack needs to compile with MSVC. U

Re: __attribute__ ((cleanup) patch

2012-10-18 Thread Pavel Simerda
> From: "Colin Walters" > Hi, Hi, thanks for a quick reply. > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=685440 > > has a patch which just landed, but I wanted to give wider discussion > to this, because it's a very important infrastructural change. > > First, one thing that came up is a conce

__attribute__ ((cleanup) patch

2012-10-18 Thread Colin Walters
Hi, https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=685440 has a patch which just landed, but I wanted to give wider discussion to this, because it's a very important infrastructural change. First, one thing that came up is a concern about a GCC hard dependency. My understanding is that LLVM implemen

Re: [PATCH](or feature-request) build both systemd and ck versions

2012-10-18 Thread Pavel Simerda
In my opinion, you should have just one binary. It is easy to detect systemd at runtime, as it requires cgroups and creates one. Symlink management is an overkill here. CK should be likewise very easy to detect. In absence of both, NetworkManager should still work. Pavel - Original Message --