[openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- From: Philippe Houdoin <philippe.houdoin@xxxxxxx>
- To: openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:51:25 +0200 (CEST)
vladimir wrote:
> I thought that PPPinterface class should be based on Interface class.
> This way you don't need to declare Up(), Down() and other common methods
> that would be inherirted from base class. You still can override them.
Sure.
Problem is that, currently, we don't have an Interface class defined already.
Only a interface kernel module C api.
And, at least for me, no time to design a new stack with classes.
Be welcome to jump here ;-)
-Philippe
- Follow-Ups:
- [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- From: Axel Dörfler
- References:
- [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- From: vladimir reikine
Other related posts:
- » [openbeosnetteam] PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- » [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- From: Axel Dörfler
- [openbeosnetteam] Re: PPP API
- From: vladimir reikine