[patch] remove wireless support

[Robert Love]

On Wed, 2004-06-02 at 10:32 +0200, Owen Fraser-Green wrote:

> No, the Linux system needs iwlib but what about all the other operating
> systems that HAL could (and hopefully one day, will) run on?

This argument does not fly: the same thinking can be applied to iwlib.

> Surely pretty much everything HAL does could theoretically be done much
> better using dedicated libraries for each of those tasks.

Not device discovery, exported a hierarchy of your devices, and so on.
It does those well.

> Another important feature of HAL though is it's potential to provide nearly
> everything under one roof.

I don't see "everything under one root" as a feature at all!  But, then,
maybe that is why I don't use Emacs.  ;-)

> I agree the two code path thing is odd but I think a better goal is to
> strengthen HAL to provide the missing second one instead of crippling it
> by not providing any.

That takes us back to the previous argument, which I feel leads us down
a slipper slope toward feature bloat, unclear scope, and potential
sudden brutal death.

	Robert Love



_______________________________________________
hal mailing list
hal at freedesktop.org
http://freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/hal