On Fri, 2008-09-05 at 23:56 -1000, David Cantrell wrote: > On Sep 5, 2008, at 6:39 PM, Debarshi Ray wrote: > > >> currently Linux-specific is random bits to get info from the wireless > >> card (which could be replaced by enhancing the wpa_supplicant dbus > >> interface) and the routing and addressing stuff (which is pretty well > >> encapsulated in libnl already and could be separated out in NM > >> itself). > > > > Isn't libnl PF_NETLINK socket specific? *BSDs use PF_ROUTE sockets > > which differ from their PF_NETLINK counterparts. > > NM's use of libnl and iproute2 will cause portability problems, yes.
Yeah, though the places are pretty much encapsulated and shouldn't be too hard to pull out. > >> It would be interesting to try a quick port and see just how much > >> needs > >> to be changed and then start figuring out how best to break up the > >> code > >> in SVN to help that effort. Care to take a stab? :) > > > > I had a brief look at the code, and found that we need to replace the > > parts which directly spawn iproute2 utilities. Would you to replace > > those parts with API calls to some library? > > > For the most part (what I've seen in the code), NM is using libnl in > as many places where it will work. Some things were not implemented > in libnl and NM calls /sbin/ip directly. I think moving NM to using > libnl completely is the best idea. It should not be using /sbin/ip. We've killed almost all usage of /sbin/ip already and if there's any left it should be taken out and shot. Dan _______________________________________________ NetworkManager-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
