Hi Tomasz, > > Consistency. Removing any evidence that the device is wifi-capable is > > just wrong. Not exposing the hw-block state to UI is wrong as well and > > now that you mention it, I think I've complained about it before:) > True, you opened a bug long ago on BMC. > > Anyway wifi card has no driver, wifi technology will not show. This > differ from > bluetooth technology as far as I saw on my machine. Probably a bug here > again. > (no driver -> no "device" -> so no technology) > > Anyway, will have to check the full code of technology. > Figured out that hard block is completely out of the game in it. (It's > detected but not handled). > As well the other stuff I mentioned about backend/driver issue. > > I will probably come up with much more patches.
this is something we might need to discuss in a separate thread. Right now I would say that a hard blocked device should not appear in ConnMan at all. It is not something that can be controlled by software. The problem with hard blocks are that you don't know if there actually is a physical switch or not. They might be hard blocked for some other reasons. Unless we know for sure that we have a switch. It makes no sense to tell the user to look for a switch if there is none. My current feeling is that we should just hide technologies that are hard blocked. At least for 1.0 API. For a future API revision, we can talk about having something more advanced. However the comment from above still is valid. We need to know if the hardware has a physical switch or not. Regards Marcel _______________________________________________ connman mailing list [email protected] http://lists.connman.net/listinfo/connman
