User talk:Holomorph

From ArchWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WPA supplicant/wpa_cli

This is probably your favourite section, but consider these facts:

  1. It is not necessary to use wpa_cli at all, so it should not be in front of the Configuration section, suggesting that it is somewhat superior. It is much better to place it below Configuration (either as subsection or top-level section, I don't care) and reference to it with common tasks - i.e. don't duplicate things like the command to start wpa_supplicant.
  2. wpa_cli can be used for much more things than simple associating, so current section title is rather inappropriate. I think that Using wpa_cli is the best title. There is an old lost section which I plan to re-include to the page, which is why I created separate section for Adding new network.

Maybe I just don't understand the reasons presented in the edit summary, perhaps you could elaborate?

-- Lahwaacz (talk) 22:57, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

  1. Supplicant needs no configuration file to run, but needs a couple lines to be useful, persistent, and usable with the cli. I do not suggest wpa_cli's superiority, rather the priority of associating with a WAP before any further configuration. Simple first, fancy next.
  2. My intent is to cover use of Supplicant and CLI to get the necessities done. The help dialogues and command completions in CLI are terse and the tool is not very well documented--virtually everything else is documented exhaustively (including command line options, capabilities, configurations). To include every detail from the docs is not necessary.
  3. Yes, wpa_cli does everything. The title used to be Connecting with wpa_cli, which is exactly what the section documented. I do not know why I changed it this time around.
  4. Re: duplicating. I only wrote the invocation needed for the utility I cover.
Holomorph (talk) 00:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
First of all, wpa_passphrase essid passphrase > config_file looks much simpler than running wpa_cli (it is at least more straightforward).
Next, which part seems to you overly verbose? There is not much difference in content of the two revisions, so I don't think this problem is relevant to this discussion.
That said, I'd suggest the following changes:
  1. move the section below Configuration (top-level), name it Using wpa_cli
  2. create separate sub-section for Association (or Adding new network) supposing new content will be added (e.g. the action script)
This looks pretty much like the previous revision (sorry), so it might be quicker to just undo the last edit...
-- Lahwaacz (talk) 06:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
- Well, output from wpa_passphrase ought to be appended, and if Supplicant is running one still has to restart Supplicant or, assuming the ctrl_inferface, wpa_cli reconfigure, which is basically the same. Then you don't know if you've been associated unless you reopen wpa_cli and get the feedback, you're watching the journal, polling wpa_cli status, or something like dhcpcd runs out and gets you an IP.
- I agree wpa_passphrase is simpler. Inserting that before scanning would be good, and I should not have omitted it.
- It is trivial to move the section and change headers. I can agree to moving at least parts of that section, but to introduce Supplicant without its very useful CLI would be a disservice.
Holomorph (talk) 18:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Well, as there are no more reasons against, I've undone your edit [1], effectively making Using wpa_cli a top-level section below Configuration. It also includes some wording changes, for the better I hope... Please don't add content already covered in Configuration to Using wpa_cli, this duplication should be avoided.
I've also created a dummy subsection Action script with the link to the old revision so that it is clear that there is some content to be added, I don't have the time to add it right now.
-- Lahwaacz (talk) 20:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)