From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-63738-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF2DA138247
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 00:13:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6162DE0E3C;
Thu, 5 Dec 2013 00:13:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qa0-f54.google.com (mail-qa0-f54.google.com [209.85.216.54])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71D47E0B8A
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 00:13:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id f11so7206410qae.20
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:13:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references
:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to
:user-agent;
bh=grLqW1H+ZfVO8NEmAs2OX90oxZtvj97R95bC6jNV590=;
b=YihG4JE7tFV816AL9nOMYcqXbTFKlb/Ewbjk9uWwOFz57OzK0LrLoOrYs2ffOoagyd
6budYRHXmWqpXh1jKCslIgmq5jkwnBnvaM/J+j2xmO6B0fDld2o11t+DvygYrkDAdCTc
F4Sj1svzDgp/Zk85eExQvTmVDjLMpgN4qYx013e6aWppC/Fsfz14R3L9WMFmi5zskLZj
RG8M+5vePxWijmzGW4CMNcMDs3pr4otrPU60Sl86GYuABGuCKIJk4KaDKH7eAeRWpTI3
OnwkGMkcH5T/RBZ7BKk8ymOcn6Kr4qbHA1d4oYGvOnRpu29BmAU/pU356jY2qs4i2M84
5xWw==
X-Received: by 10.49.26.129 with SMTP id l1mr40312905qeg.37.1386202393472;
Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:13:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-91-128.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.91.128])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o10sm24322542qaa.6.2013.12.04.16.13.11
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:13:12 -0800 (PST)
Sender: William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com>
Received: by linux1 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 04 Dec 2013 18:13:09 -0600
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 18:13:09 -0600
From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up
Message-ID: <20131205001309.GA19961@linux1>
Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
References: <20131201102015.GA1219@egeo>
<20131202202845.GA8574@linux1>
<529CF973.2020008@gentoo.org>
<529CFAA1.7080608@gentoo.org>
<CAO-1Pb4Bspe-Yv57S70rFdeX4M48cXQ=H6D=4THfeGU9i89=Dw@mail.gmail.com>
<20131203211130.GA31972@linux1>
<529F5C6C.7060704@gentoo.org>
<20131204212537.GA19609@linux1>
<CAJ0EP40tcMaDrjZMdyvUmpzgX8jTufOfXzvbc5QvMRnuN3nTjg@mail.gmail.com>
<529FBE92.4000003@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="envbJBWh7q8WU6mo"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <529FBE92.4000003@gentoo.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Archives-Salt: b5979d20-1892-4036-b2b3-95034d355c0d
X-Archives-Hash: 1032c46cc4f9e1fca50a717106a21ac6
--envbJBWh7q8WU6mo
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 07:45:22AM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 12/05/2013 05:30 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wro=
te:
> >> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> >>> seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in
> >>> random package(s) a la binary-distribution style
> >>
> >> What about the stages? Don't we need some form of net support in
> >> stage 3?
> >>
> >=20
> > That's debatable. For a typical install, the user has to install other
> > basic stuff like a boot loader, kernel, etc. So having them also
> > select a network config framework seems logical.
> >=20
> > Is there a use case for a stage3 in which installing netifrc by hand
> > is impractical?
> >=20
> Well ...
>=20
> I remember filing a bug quite a while ago because we didn't have a dhcp
> client included anymore. This made installs quite annoying because
> before it was stage3, kernel, bootloader, go!
>=20
> And now it was go ... stop ... reboot ... install dhcp client ...
> grremblwrrxrmkrxtlmrrrg .... reboot
Are you sure this was caused by an issue in the stages? The description
you are giving sounds like an issue with the LiveCD.
William
--envbJBWh7q8WU6mo
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlKfxRUACgkQblQW9DDEZThCuwCfXB7ZEocjeY657W0lGCfRVdy9
sLYAn06jb0kctAPNemJqja4dgKv9VBt2
=cumt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--envbJBWh7q8WU6mo--