SCF was designed to allow dynamic changes to the system without
having drivers get involved.
I have no reason to believe that SCF is capable of controlling Airport
(or any other) hardware directly, so my assumption is that the driver
would, at the very least, need to link against that framework and
listen to those notifications. This constitutes a certain degree of
involvement not always possible in every driver project.
Whether or not such a dependency would be considered undesirable in
the case of the Airport driver, I have no idea--never touched it or
talked to anyone who has--but it's not something I would have expected
to work, personally, and that's all I said.
If it IS supposed to work, then obviously it isn't, as his code
clearly showed that he was calling both SCPreferencesCommitChanges and
SCPreferencesApplyChanges correctly, as well as obtaining all of the
requisite locks, which should by all rights have precluded the
recitation of advice pertaining to such matters. I have faith that
Allan would have been the first to pick up on any deficiencies in that
department.
