Hi Patrik,

On 01/09/2014 02:21 PM, Patrik Flykt wrote:
> 
>       Hi,
> 
> On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 09:34 +0100, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> From: Daniel Wagner <[email protected]>
>>
>> We need to change the behavior for the AutoConnect=true case
>> with sessions. The use case is that we have only sessions users.
>> When no session asks for a connection the system should stay idle.
>> Currently when the system is idle, ConnMan will attempt immedidatly
>> to auto connect. When sessions are used, we can defer this until
>> an user/application does a Session.Connect().
> 
> I don't think this is what is needed. 

What you mean is not needed? The behavior as such or the variable?

> On a generic system there is no
> way to distinguish between a case where only session users exist where
> none have either yet requested a session wrt the case where there are
> none.

The current auto connect tries to stay connected. As I explained several
times for my uses cases it should behave here differently. An idle
system (no session wants a connection) needs to go and stay offline.
That wont happen with the current behavior. I agree it is not possible
to know if there are users with or without session etc.

In short I need a different auto connect behavior.

> We already have almost too many variables in main.conf...

I agree.

> 
>> Unfortunatly AutoConnect can't be changed at this point (we would need
>> a tristate boolean) we add a global flag which allows to change
>> the behavior of the auto connect state machine.
> 
> Enums for > 2 values can be used, can you elaborate what the thing is
> that can't be changed.

I consider AutoConnect as part of the stable API guarantees. Hmm, we
could though do following. Instead using g_key_file_get_boolean() we
implement your own parser which supports the current boolean values but
also 'SessionMode'. That avoids introducing another main.conf flag.

cheers,
daniel

_______________________________________________
connman mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.connman.net/mailman/listinfo/connman

Reply via email to