From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C216138247 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 00:18:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 24A49E0E78; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 00:18:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47CA4E0E74 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 00:18:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.101] (unknown [124.78.108.163]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: patrick) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1FEFF33F141 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 00:18:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <529FC6DF.3080002@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 08:20:47 +0800 From: Patrick Lauer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up References: <20131201102015.GA1219@egeo> <20131202202845.GA8574@linux1> <529CF973.2020008@gentoo.org> <529CFAA1.7080608@gentoo.org> <20131203211130.GA31972@linux1> <529F5C6C.7060704@gentoo.org> <20131204212537.GA19609@linux1> <529FBE92.4000003@gentoo.org> <20131205001309.GA19961@linux1> In-Reply-To: <20131205001309.GA19961@linux1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 7f953851-1bd8-4c6e-b6f2-7509732dafa9 X-Archives-Hash: e8b1d16d361a1f5a8fc6e6b7bdb2b795 On 12/05/2013 08:13 AM, William Hubbs wrote: > 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 wrote: >>>> 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? >>>> >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> Is there a use case for a stage3 in which installing netifrc by hand >>> is impractical? >>> >> Well ... >> >> 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! >> >> 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 > Yes ... change must have been ~2006 Result: No dhcp client in stage3 (thanks Wolf31o2) And it took a long time to be properly fixed