Wpad vs hostapd + wpa-supplicant

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

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 \

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


This topic was automatically closed 10 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.