From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-63914-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 693F2138247 for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 15 Dec 2013 01:38:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5BCC1E0CCC; Sun, 15 Dec 2013 01:38:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.194]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C1D9E0CC7 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 15 Dec 2013 01:37:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (66-208-231-133.ubr01a.rte20201.pa.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [66.208.231.133]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus2) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Mdaw0-1WAnYO3jum-00Pyb4; Sat, 14 Dec 2013 20:37:58 -0500 Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 19:37:55 -0600 From: mingdao <gentoo-dev@happypenguincomputers.com> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up Message-ID: <20131215013755.GG5364@server> References: <CAO-1Pb4Bspe-Yv57S70rFdeX4M48cXQ=H6D=4THfeGU9i89=Dw@mail.gmail.com> <20131203211130.GA31972@linux1> <52A2B788.3040409@gentoo.org> <20131208222552.GA22567@linux1> <52A5D89A.4080506@gentoo.org> <CAGfcS_ksGkU9vUSaZY=vcdposZOiZRMuVwjYBp5b=iqUGFgnFw@mail.gmail.com> <52A62062.9030109@gentoo.org> <20131211025755.GA23458@linux1> <20131214172410.GD5364@server> <20131215005950.GA27896@linux1> 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: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131215005950.GA27896@linux1> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:N7oj7dMRYuCBeD6LpE9xQrNf+hOQV2ZEKSGclkZAjyW 3Oz62Trdx/GIPerV6QOGlbsjEIxyY66+jab04LW1g6YX6GwKX4 ywKBlMDDkiadu/dHlEF94i7UBhwUgOFaRV+xJzUfyofhDy7aBs jgn6ss/dl8g8Z9qCJVP6x28FH7VEsH7VyjpTHe9nOLiebp5ZAD tHkjQNKAGCo9cwxOSM/9xrx0NhFmyLGTKSBSrV3TcnGaoH8n4x Fk7suVUQi734Zry1dXamSpOoXkSViw6p6gVtyNPZVw8f/uy0Rv RskbKagoHAzvLNVw406x+ulsKVblxoGueylOsTF6gzE9cXkZOz wLAgfWTn4G+sbqRcAHE9RymLfVyzPNdh+Z1Amd98t X-Archives-Salt: 0566f722-130b-4ea6-bc57-a6afb4abcfe0 X-Archives-Hash: 241e440c166d184929169e57b8a6fc28 On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 06:59:50PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote: > You make some good points. I'll answer your questions as best as I can, > but we can consider this thread closed. I will not try to put the > virtual in, but I will come back to the list soon and start another > thread. > > In a nutshell, our networking is a beast, and we should try to simplify > it some how imo. I'll write out my thoughts about that when I start the > other thread. > > > On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 11:24:10AM -0600, mingdao wrote: > > (1) What is "the new network stack" provided by the newnet USE flag? > > That consists of the network and staticroute scripts which are part of > OpenRC. The network script sets up interfaces and configures static > addresses only; it will allow you to run any command at any point in the > process of doing this. What some people on Gentoo do not like about it > is it is all or nothing. You can't start/stop/depend on a single > interface. > > The staticroute script is used to configure multiple static routes once > the network script has set up the static addresses. > > > (2) Why is dhcpcd referred to as a "network manager" in the same context as > > wicd, networkmanager, connman, etc? In the sense that dhcpcd is not sufficient > > for security protected wireless alone, as is, say, wicd; and is not a > > replacement for true "network manager" apps. DHCP client != network manager > > app > > This is a good point, so I will drop putting dhcpcd on the list. > > > (3) Is udhcpc provided by busybox not sufficient in lieu of dhcpcd for stage3? > > I think udhcpc is what you get in stage 3; if dhcpcd is there, I have no > idea how it is getting there. > > William Thanks for your kind reply, William. I'm a networking n00b, but felt those questions might benefit others, also. For (3) it seemed as if some people were saying dhcpcd is in stage 3 and they didn't want it dropped. I have a tendency to use busybox a lot doing a Gentoo install, starting with "ln -s /bin/busybox /bin/vi" :D Kindest regards, Bruce -- Happy Penguin Computers >') 126 Fenco Drive ( \ Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^ support@happypenguincomputers.com 662-269-2706 662-205-6424 http://happypenguincomputers.com/ A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting