From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gustavo Zacarias Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:05:42 -0300 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] optional DBus support in wpa_supplicant In-Reply-To: <1247495564.20117.4.camel@sven> References: <1247473258.4007.7.camel@sven> <1247476399.4007.13.camel@sven> <87ljms981c.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <1247495564.20117.4.camel@sven> Message-ID: <4A5B4D46.6010807@zacarias.com.ar> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Sven Neumann wrote: > I don't have a strong opinion on that. The DBus control interface adds > about 24kB to the the wpa_supplicant binary size. People might have DBus > enabled for some other reason and don't need this feature in > wpa_supplicant. But then, perhaps it's just not worth the extra > option... > > > Sven Being the one "guilty" of wpa_supplicant updates i don't have a strong opinion on this either. On one side wpa_supplicant has it's own way of controlling itself via wpa_cli and thus somewhat negates the need for dbus bindings. On the other side you may not want to fork to call wpa_cli and/or learn the wpa_supplicant/cli controlling protocol (or other good reasons), and if you already have dbus enabled those extra 24k probably won't hurt that much in the global scheme of things - after all people who want to save that last KB will probably steer away from dbus. Regards.