[arch-releng] 2010.04.05 snapshots ready for testing
dieter at plaetinck.be
Fri Apr 16 04:12:19 EDT 2010
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:35:21 +0200
Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org> wrote:
> Am 16.04.2010 01:19, schrieb Aaron Griffin:
> > Sending from my phone, so I apologize for the top posting.
> > Last night I did a real install on a spare laptop using this ISO.
> > It was ordinary and vanilla, but everything was happy and nice.
> > My biggest issues were with regard to wireless.
> > A) There's nothing for wireless networking in the network section.
> > That'd be nice
> > B) wpa_supplicant.conf would be a good config to add to the list,
> > considering we're trying to enforce using that
> > C) Auto configuring of rc.conf treats wireless interfaces as
> > ethernet.
> > None of these are really bugs. More like feature requests, I guess.
> A dialog-based configuration tool that generates a netcfg profile
> would be very nice here, it would allow all kinds of configurations,
> including different wireless modes.
I rarely use wireless so forgive my ignorance.
1) wpa_supplicant is in base. is this needed? or should it be added to
the list @ http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18495
2) what's wrong with C) ? network settings in rc.conf are IP stuff, so
wlan and eth interfaces can be treated the same, no?
3) maybe i should grep all interfaces in /etc/rc.conf, check if they
are wireless ones with iwconfig, and if so add /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf
to the list? (or: if wpa_supplicant gets installed if it gets out of
Basically, you need to tell me what the best practices are to set up
wireless networking, how i should store that to the configs and what
things that should change (such as adding wpa_supplicant.conf to the
list of files to edit)
Or maybe do it directly as feature requests on flyspray, as the chance
that I'll do it anytime soon is small.
> > And one other thing unrelated to wireless:
> > If I didn't edit mkinitcpio.conf, there's no need to generate the
> > initramfs again in the config section. Perhaps md5sum the config
> > files before and after editing to see if a given action is
> > necessary?
> Good idea I guess.
there's has been some discussion about why we do mkinitcpio and
does mkinitcpio *only* depend on /etc/mkinitcpio.conf, i.e. if that
file is the same (but anything else can change) we don't need to
AFAIK things are be a bit more complicated then that and may
not be worth the extra hassle of implementing the needed checks and
More information about the arch-releng