On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 03:52:29PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > Hi, > > > > define Package/wpa-supplicant-openssl $(call > > > Package/wpa-supplicant/Default,$(1)) > > > + TITLE+= (OpenSSL) > > > > shouldn't this rather be '(OpenSSL full)' as well then? > > > > > VARIANT:=supplicant-full-openssl > > > DEPENDS+=+libopenssl > > > endef > > > > > > define Package/wpa-supplicant-wolfssl $(call > > > Package/wpa-supplicant/Default,$(1)) > > > + TITLE+= (wolfSSL) > > > > shouldn't this rather be '(wolfSSL full)' as well then? > > Indeed, good find, will change both cases above as suggested. > > > And what about the '(built-in full)' variant of wpa_supplicant? > > Err, yes, to follow the current scheme I should add a "(full)" there as well. > > Would you prefer to use "(built-in full)" instead of plain "(full)" in all > non-SSL cases? > This might actually be more helpful to differentiate.
I'd prefer "(built-in full)" as those variants do offer some basic SSL functionality as well (enough for EAP-TLS and EAP-TTLS afaik) > > Thanks > > Adrian _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
