[PATCH 1/2] [0.4.8] eloop extension for dbus control interface, v2

[Dan Williams]

On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 19:26 -0700, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 09:48:28AM -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> 
> > The following patch adds the infrastructure necessary to support DBus
> > bound to the eloop runloop.  Jouni, I think this takes care of the eloop
> > API concerns you had at the wireless summit, let me know what you think.
> > If the eloop interface looks good, feel free to commit and I'll keep
> > working on the DBus control interface.  It should be fully contained and
> > separate from the rest of the code, and needs to be enabled in the
> > config file to be compiled in.
> 
> This looks quite good. However, type casting a function pointer to
> different type and then calling read_sock handler function with one
> extra parameter looks somewhat scary.. Is that guaranteed to work with
> all commonly used ANSI C compilers and CPUs?

AFAIK it does, but I'd have to check.  The glib/gtk compatibility
guidelines say something about this but I'll ping some gcc folk and ask.

> > Please review for commit to 0.4.8.  I'll whip up a 0.5.x patch too, if
> > this one looks OK for 0.4.8.  Since most distros are shipping 0.4.8
> > right now, and at least Fedora will be using 0.4.8+dbus in the near
> > future, I'd rather do parallel development on 0.4.8 and 0.5.x rather
> > than just targeting 0.5.x and making people who want to use dbus use a
> > development version of wpa_supplicant.  (unless I misunderstand the
> > structure of branches?)
> 
> All new features to wpa_supplicant need to be first added into the
> current development branch (0.5.x) and once they have been shown to be
> stable, they can be considered for merging into the latest stable branch
> (0.4.x). The changes for 0.4.x can, of course, live outside my
> repository if they are needed more quickly than the path through
> development branch takes. I just want to be able to concentrate on a
> single branch for new development and stable releases of wpa_supplicant
> do indeed mean stable in the sense of not really changing much.

Ok, 0.5.x patch coming up then.

Dan