Return-path: Received: from mail-wr0-f195.google.com ([209.85.128.195]:36520 "EHLO mail-wr0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751400AbdGAJHN (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Jul 2017 05:07:13 -0400 Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2017 10:06:55 +0100 (BST) From: Sami Kerola To: Karel Zak cc: Johannes Berg , Marcel Holtmann , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, util-linux Subject: Re: rfkill(8) move and improvements In-Reply-To: <20170630074729.s3gknfobabgepk4h@ws.net.home> Message-ID: (sfid-20170701_110721_650331_CBF9C089) References: <1498745040.3141.6.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20170630074729.s3gknfobabgepk4h@ws.net.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Karel Zak wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:23:12PM +0100, Sami Kerola wrote: > > On 29 June 2017 at 15:04, Johannes Berg wrote: > > >> The otherday I ran powertop and it did rfkill to save battery, which > > >> was particularly annoying because I had not installed rfkill(8) > > >> package. > > >> Fixing the immediate issue was relatively easy, but the ordeal made > > >> me wonder if this tool could be moved to a package that is installed > > >> by default to all systems, such as util-linux. > > > > > > [...] > > > > > >> What do you think, would the move and proposed updates be ok? > > > > > > I can't say I mind, and most of your proposed changes seem sensible, > > > though I haven't reviewed them in enough detail to comment on them. > > > Something that caught my eye here was comparing a string to _("all") > > > which seems wrong, since that'd mean you'd have to type the translated > > > version even on the command line? That seems really awkward (to put it > > > charitably). > > > > > > However, at the same time, I have very little desire to get involved > > > with util-linux as yet another project, so frankly I'd probably > > > continue to "maintain" the current rfkill tool - which really hasn't > > > changed in a very long time, and hope somebody else picks up > > > maintenance of rfkill included in util-linux. > > > > Hello Johannes, > > > > Thank you for feedback. I removed the rfkill command strings from > > translations, and gave hint to translators how to deal with them in > > usage() output. Also in same go updates are rebased on top of > > most recent upstream to get usage() --help and --version handling > > done correctly. > > > > What comes to maintenance I am fairly optimistic util-linux is a > > good home for the rfkill. Karel, what do you think? > > I have no problem with it, if Johannes agree with this step. We have > definitely manpower to maintain it. Hello, I did couple last minute changes to my remote branch, that should now be ready for final review. git://github.com/kerolasa/lelux-utiliteetit.git rfkill The changes: 1. Add commit to make rfkill_event struct read size check to be back and forward compatible. https://github.com/kerolasa/lelux-utiliteetit/commit/fdb76db0d32fdd77bff49b6c2a7db77763b1c4e4 2. Refer this email thread in merge commit. https://github.com/kerolasa/lelux-utiliteetit/commit/0b6c2693debf1219cfbe39dcf70e208abc94c1af 3. Change 'yes' and 'no' in rfkill status output to 'blocked' and 'unblocked' that are more associative with command strings. Here is a sample output: $ rfkill DEVICE ID TYPE SOFT HARD ideapad_wlan 0 wlan unblocked unblocked ideapad_bluetooth 1 bluetooth blocked unblocked hci0 2 bluetooth blocked unblocked phy0 3 wlan unblocked unblocked 4. Mark in configure.ac rfkill is linux only utility. https://github.com/kerolasa/lelux-utiliteetit/commit/5f715abb96a4fa3699bcfdb35d029d7ae3a5ea07#diff-67e997bcfdac55191033d57a16d1408aR1596 5. Small wording change in --output manual page entry: s/list of all supported/list of available/. The later matches with --help output title, hopefully makes it easier to know what is being referred. -- Sami Kerola http://www.iki.fi/kerolasa/