iw in place of wireless-tools

iw in place of wireless-tools

[Ahsan, Noor]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1135 bytes --]

Hello,

I read in couple of threads that iw is replacing wireless-tools in linux wireless world and people recommending replacing wireless-tools with iw in oe-core. I did not see it happening. Here I am starting this thread to discuss this so that we can make the decision and replace these two recipes with each other. Comments?

Noor

Noor Ahsan | Engineering Manager Mentor Embedded Linux & Hypervisor
Mentor Embedded<http://www.mentor.com/embedded>(tm) |5-6-7-8th floors 105  B2 Gulberg III, Ali Tower
MM Alam Road, Lahore
P +92 42 36099196 | M +92 307 4448444
Nucleus<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/nucleus/>(r) | Linux<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/linux/>(r) | Android<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/android/>(tm) | Services<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/services/> | UI<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/inflexion/> | Multi-OS<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/multicore-multi-os>

Android is a trademark of Google Inc. Use of this trademark is subject to Google Permissions.
Linux is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other countries.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4425 bytes --]

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Iorga, Cristian]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2062 bytes --]

Hello Noor, all,

An analysis of the differences, improvements, maybe possible shortcomings of iw versus wireless-tools would be nice.

For a start:
http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Documentation/iw/replace-iwconfig
Basically, this says that iw is simpler to use than wireless-tools various commands.
It is unclear to me if iw functionality matches wireless-tools functionality or maybe surpasses it, maybe someone else has info on this?
On my Ubuntu 13.10 dev machine, wireless-tools and iw are both installed by default (I might be wrong here, maybe I installed them some time ago by hand).


Regards,
Cristian Iorga
YP
Intel

From: openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org [mailto:openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of Ahsan, Noor
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 3:55 PM
To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: [OE-core] iw in place of wireless-tools

Hello,

I read in couple of threads that iw is replacing wireless-tools in linux wireless world and people recommending replacing wireless-tools with iw in oe-core. I did not see it happening. Here I am starting this thread to discuss this so that we can make the decision and replace these two recipes with each other. Comments?

Noor

Noor Ahsan | Engineering Manager Mentor Embedded Linux & Hypervisor
Mentor Embedded<http://www.mentor.com/embedded>(tm) |5-6-7-8th floors 105  B2 Gulberg III, Ali Tower
MM Alam Road, Lahore
P +92 42 36099196 | M +92 307 4448444
Nucleus<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/nucleus/>(r) | Linux<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/linux/>(r) | Android<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/android/>(tm) | Services<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/services/> | UI<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/inflexion/> | Multi-OS<http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software/multicore-multi-os>

Android is a trademark of Google Inc. Use of this trademark is subject to Google Permissions.
Linux is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other countries.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6802 bytes --]

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Nicolas Dechesne]

On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Iorga, Cristian
<cristian.iorga@intel.com> wrote:
> On my Ubuntu 13.10 dev machine, wireless-tools and iw are both installed by
> default (I might be wrong here, maybe I installed them some time ago by
> hand).

you are right, they are both on the default install, see

http://releases.ubuntu.com/13.10/ubuntu-13.10-desktop-amd64.manifest

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Chris Larson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 836 bytes --]

On Friday, January 31, 2014, Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org>
wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Iorga, Cristian
> <cristian.iorga@intel.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > On my Ubuntu 13.10 dev machine, wireless-tools and iw are both installed
> by
> > default (I might be wrong here, maybe I installed them some time ago by
> > hand).
>
> you are right, they are both on the default install, see
>
> http://releases.ubuntu.com/13.10/ubuntu-13.10-desktop-amd64.manifest


For what its worth, I personally would love to see wireless-tools go away
in favor of iw, much as ifconfig has gone to the wayside in favor of
iputils.

-Chris


-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1284 bytes --]

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Christopher Larson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2477 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote:

> On Friday, January 31, 2014, Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Iorga, Cristian
>> <cristian.iorga@intel.com> wrote:
>> > On my Ubuntu 13.10 dev machine, wireless-tools and iw are both
>> installed by
>> > default (I might be wrong here, maybe I installed them some time ago by
>> > hand).
>>
>> you are right, they are both on the default install, see
>>
>> http://releases.ubuntu.com/13.10/ubuntu-13.10-desktop-amd64.manifest
>
>
> For what its worth, I personally would love to see wireless-tools go away
> in favor of iw, much as ifconfig has gone to the wayside in favor of
> iputils.
>

Bringing this back up again, as I think we really need to at the *very*
least pull in iw from meta-oe into oe-core, and adjust packagegroup-base
(worst case, with a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME), and better yet also drop
wireless-tools / move it to meta-networking.

From the debian /usr/share/doc/iw/README.Debian:

    Why is wireless-tools being replaced?
    =====================================

    A complete summary of technical reasons for the abandonment of Linux
Wireless
    Extensions API is documented on the wireless.kernel.org wiki page for
WEXT [3].

    In brief, WEXT uses ioctl's as the kernel<->userspace communication
mechanism,
    but some developers wish to have a more structured transport mechanism,
which
    cfg80211 and nl80211 provide, to allow them to address old nagging
problems
    with the current wireless device configuration implementation, and give
them
    more freedom to enhance the process of wireless configuration [4].

    WEXT is in deep maintenance mode, cfg80211 and nl80211 are the
communication
    transport mechanism of the future.

    [3]
http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/Documentation/Wireless-Extensions
    [4] which is one of the areas which, in my opinion, has always been
difficult
        for new adopters on Linux, especially on the desktop.

Also:

    https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/users/Documentation/iw indicates
"The old tool iwconfing, which uses Wireless Extensions interface, is
deprecated and it's strongly recommended to switch to iw and nl80211."
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4210 bytes --]

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Christopher Larson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 689 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>
wrote:

> Bringing this back up again, as I think we really need to at the *very*
> least pull in iw from meta-oe into oe-core, and adjust packagegroup-base
> (worst case, with a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME), and better yet also drop
> wireless-tools / move it to meta-networking.


Worst case, we could keep both in VIRTUAL-RUNTIME for compatibility, as a
temporary measure, but I think we need to get iw into oe-core and into the
base images for sure.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1006 bytes --]

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Philip Balister]

On 08/18/2015 06:00 PM, Christopher Larson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Bringing this back up again, as I think we really need to at the *very*
>> least pull in iw from meta-oe into oe-core, and adjust packagegroup-base
>> (worst case, with a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME), and better yet also drop
>> wireless-tools / move it to meta-networking.
> 
> 
> Worst case, we could keep both in VIRTUAL-RUNTIME for compatibility, as a
> temporary measure, but I think we need to get iw into oe-core and into the
> base images for sure.

I agree completely.

Philip

> 
> 
> 

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Khem Raj]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1043 bytes --]


> On Aug 18, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com <mailto:clarson@kergoth.com>> wrote:
> Bringing this back up again, as I think we really need to at the *very* least pull in iw from meta-oe into oe-core, and adjust packagegroup-base (worst case, with a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME), and better yet also drop wireless-tools / move it to meta-networking.
> 
> Worst case, we could keep both in VIRTUAL-RUNTIME for compatibility, as a temporary measure, but I think we need to get iw into oe-core and into the base images for sure.

yes I think its a good idea

> --
> Christopher Larson
> clarson at kergoth dot com
> Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
> Maintainer - Tslib
> Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2133 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2015-08-18 at 09:00 -0700, Christopher Larson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Christopher Larson
> <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote:
>         Bringing this back up again, as I think we really need to at
>         the *very* least pull in iw from meta-oe into oe-core, and
>         adjust packagegroup-base (worst case, with a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME),
>         and better yet also drop wireless-tools / move it to
>         meta-networking.
> 
> Worst case, we could keep both in VIRTUAL-RUNTIME for compatibility,
> as a temporary measure, but I think we need to get iw into oe-core and
> into the base images for sure.

Agreed, patches would be welcome!

Cheers,

Richard

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Otavio Salvador]

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 18, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Bringing this back up again, as I think we really need to at the *very*
>> least pull in iw from meta-oe into oe-core, and adjust packagegroup-base
>> (worst case, with a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME), and better yet also drop
>> wireless-tools / move it to meta-networking.
>
>
> Worst case, we could keep both in VIRTUAL-RUNTIME for compatibility, as a
> temporary measure, but I think we need to get iw into oe-core and into the
> base images for sure.
>
>
> yes I think its a good idea
>

Agreed as well.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Anders Darander]

* Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> [150818 18:00]:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>
> wrote:
> > Bringing this back up again, as I think we really need to at the *very*
> > least pull in iw from meta-oe into oe-core, and adjust packagegroup-base
> > (worst case, with a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME), and better yet also drop
> > wireless-tools / move it to meta-networking.

> Worst case, we could keep both in VIRTUAL-RUNTIME for compatibility, as a
> temporary measure, but I think we need to get iw into oe-core and into the
> base images for sure.

Yes, we should get iw into oe-core. So, I agree completely with this.

/Anders

-- 
Anders Darander
ChargeStorm AB / eStorm AB

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1150 bytes --]

And now for the elephant in the room: is anyone going to work on this? :)

Ross

On 19 August 2015 at 08:10, Anders Darander <anders@chargestorm.se> wrote:

> * Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> [150818 18:00]:
> > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Bringing this back up again, as I think we really need to at the *very*
> > > least pull in iw from meta-oe into oe-core, and adjust
> packagegroup-base
> > > (worst case, with a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME), and better yet also drop
> > > wireless-tools / move it to meta-networking.
>
> > Worst case, we could keep both in VIRTUAL-RUNTIME for compatibility, as a
> > temporary measure, but I think we need to get iw into oe-core and into
> the
> > base images for sure.
>
> Yes, we should get iw into oe-core. So, I agree completely with this.
>
> /Anders
>
> --
> Anders Darander
> ChargeStorm AB / eStorm AB
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1937 bytes --]

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Otavio Salvador]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 235 bytes --]

Em 19/08/2015 12:26, "Burton, Ross" <ross.burton@intel.com> escreveu:
>
> And now for the elephant in the room: is anyone going to work on this? :)

I can ask our people to work on this.

Is there a bug number to assign for me?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 367 bytes --]

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 524 bytes --]

On 19 August 2015 at 12:35, Otavio Salvador <
otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br> wrote:

> Em 19/08/2015 12:26, "Burton, Ross" <ross.burton@intel.com> escreveu:
> >
> > And now for the elephant in the room: is anyone going to work on this? :)
>
> I can ask our people to work on this.
>
> Is there a bug number to assign for me?
>
Not as far as I'm aware.  Note that M3 cut-off is fairly soon (August 23rd,
technically) and this would count as a Feature so switching to iw would be
out of scope for M4.

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1035 bytes --]

Re: iw in place of wireless-tools

[Christopher Larson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1125 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:

> On 19 August 2015 at 12:35, Otavio Salvador <
> otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>
>> Em 19/08/2015 12:26, "Burton, Ross" <ross.burton@intel.com> escreveu:
>> >
>> > And now for the elephant in the room: is anyone going to work on this?
>> :)
>>
>> I can ask our people to work on this.
>>
>> Is there a bug number to assign for me?
>>
> Not as far as I'm aware.  Note that M3 cut-off is fairly soon (August 23rd,
> technically) and this would count as a Feature so switching to iw would be
> out of scope for M4.


While we're at it, we should enable ip/ss/etc in busybox and decide whether
to keep netstat/ifconfig/route enabled there alongside them (I'd vote no,
personally, but don't feel very strongly about it), and drop net-tools from
full tools packagegroups in favor of iproute2.

If nobody else gets to it, I might be able to find the time.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1927 bytes --]