could be wol or wake-on-lan part of the core?

[netnomad]

hi roberts,

for several occasions i need wake-on-lan with microcore...
is wol usually part of busybox?
i guess wol is a very tiny tool that needs only few additional bytes...
do you think it is possible to include that pretty basic, fundamental function to the core?
actually i think that wol is so tiny that a new extension is too exaggerated for that function.

thank you for your help.

[curaga]

We've had ether-wake for several releases, because it is useful indeed

I assume you mean the sender of the wake-up packet. If you mean the setting utility, ethtool is a bit big.

[netnomad]

hi curaga,

thank you for your reply.
i didn't know ether-wake yet, so i will give it a try.
usually wol or wakeonlan is seen as the standard tool, so why did you choose ether-wake?
are there differences or special features about ether-wake you want to mention or share?

ethtool is for the configuration to prepare my own machine that someone else can wake me up, am i right?
wakeonlan or ether-wake is the tool that i can use to wakeup other machines.

thank you for every hint, every advice to ether-wake is welcomed.

[curaga]

Why not wol / why ether-wake?

Because ether-wake is in busybox, wol is not.

ethtool is for the configuration to prepare my own machine that someone else can wake me up, am i right?
wakeonlan or ether-wake is the tool that i can use to wakeup other machines.

Correct.