On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 08:59, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 28.02.2012 00:31, schrieb Jouke Witteveen:
Dear Thomas and the rest,
A few of us have been looking at the netcfg code lately. One thing that came to light was that FS#24599 is actualy a wpa_actiond bug, so, Thomas, could you take it upon you?
I looked into it shortly, the last comment is correct.
That comment was mine. I wondered whether there was a reason to look at occurrences of ']'.
Furthermore, Remy's development tree held 8 bugfixes and some improvements, which I augmented with another 5.5 bugfixes and 3.5 added features (the half one being a syntax to reconnect based on an interface, as a fix for FS#28196).
I would like to see someone package this work, that is available at https://github.com/joukewitteveen/netcfg and push a package to the (testing?) repository.
I am not requesting maintainership of the code (Alfredo Palhares is after it too), but I am willing to be the maintainer. My request is just to move netcfg forward.
Both of you, I'd like to point your attention towards https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-projects/2011-December/002254.h... if you haven't merged it already (the patch is also on my github).
That one was merged in 7ba4 last week :-).
Now, we need to make one of you the maintainer of the official netcfg tree on al.org. I don't know which one of you, so you two fight it out and tell us the result. Or, anyone else on this list, choose. I don't care, as long as I don't have to decide.
Will do. Thanks!