Wpad vs hostapd + wpa-supplicant

[castillofrancodamian]

What advantages and disadvantages are there if I use one or both of the others?

[jeff]

Details of what is in the variants and sub-packages can be found in package/network/services/hostapd/Makefile

At least as far as I understand it, the wpad variants are a "shortcut" for building and installing a self-consistent set of hostapd and wpa_supplicant, as suggested by constructs such as

define Build/Compile/wpad
        echo ` \
                $(call Build/RunMake,hostapd,-s MULTICALL=1 dump_cflags); \
                $(call Build/RunMake,wpa_supplicant,-s MULTICALL=1 dump_cflags) | \
                sed -e 's,-n ,,g' -e 's^$(TARGET_CFLAGS)^^' \
        ` > $(PKG_BUILD_DIR)/.cflags
        sed -i 's/"/\\"/g' $(PKG_BUILD_DIR)/.cflags
        +$(call Build/RunMake,hostapd, \
                CFLAGS="$$$$(cat $(PKG_BUILD_DIR)/.cflags)" \
                MULTICALL=1 \
                hostapd_cli hostapd_multi.a \
        )
        +$(call Build/RunMake,wpa_supplicant, \
                CFLAGS="$$$$(cat $(PKG_BUILD_DIR)/.cflags)" \
                MULTICALL=1 \
                wpa_cli wpa_supplicant_multi.a \
        )
        +export MAKEFLAGS="$(MAKE_JOBSERVER)"; $(TARGET_CC) -o $(PKG_BUILD_DIR)/wpad \
                $(TARGET_CFLAGS) \
                ./files/multicall.c \
                $(PKG_BUILD_DIR)/hostapd/hostapd_multi.a \
                $(PKG_BUILD_DIR)/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant_multi.a \
                $(TARGET_LDFLAGS)
endef

---

Edit: Checking that Makefile, it appears that "full" does not include the configuration for 802.11s that the "mesh" variant does.