Difference between revisions of "User talk:Holomorph"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(WPA supplicant/wpa_cli: re)
Line 15: Line 15:
 
:# Re: duplicating.  I only wrote the invocation needed for the utility I cover.
 
:# Re: duplicating.  I only wrote the invocation needed for the utility I cover.
 
:[[User:Holomorph|Holomorph]] ([[User talk:Holomorph|talk]]) 00:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 
:[[User:Holomorph|Holomorph]] ([[User talk:Holomorph|talk]]) 00:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
::First of all, {{ic|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:
 +
::# move the section below ''Configuration'' (top-level), name it ''Using wpa_cli''
 +
::# 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...
 +
::-- [[User:Lahwaacz|Lahwaacz]] ([[User talk:Lahwaacz|talk]]) 06:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:17, 16 October 2013

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)