From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-63735-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 A3EAD138247
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 22:36:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8EC62E0E2F;
Wed, 4 Dec 2013 22:36:41 +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 98E2EE0DFA
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 22:36:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ie0-f169.google.com (mail-ie0-f169.google.com [209.85.223.169])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
(Authenticated sender: floppym)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 80E8E33DACA
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 22:36:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ie0-f169.google.com with SMTP id e14so28621267iej.28
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 14:36:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type;
bh=Mw9bDcPgvLiJUa7gI3+oWhe7X5KJgublz9H940SNJ1g=;
b=DsJfbXDAIcmBFCLu0G0r+HHHUAY8Mr7UXmL+ZgYwkk3ZFj/s/HsAqOHelgXmFihGHr
c2qgzA9bprX4RcEgtc0b1L5TA1cMmN7UvCm2ODi5l+1Bxcxdr9WX7dNvBMOdaPeB2lkk
7Q1WgkbL9qaejWhzRHM/EEN3UxLKUkNIXkiqtNjGTvZVCMT4jjs9vXnh1KImocbYUO6E
KO0KX/vdJXtdf1H3MIvM937seFTL/BCgvQSTyfMIC5l+wmR0FJiEr41vMtxmNDahUGXh
loj60SjLJp0fH+La5kEBF+Bd+aJOKNHX35wimieh0//SqYFHF6hmLbpdpjNi/b76zk4Z
ikJg==
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
X-Received: by 10.43.52.129 with SMTP id vm1mr36186691icb.10.1386196598038;
Wed, 04 Dec 2013 14:36:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.64.139.5 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 14:36:37 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20131204223152.GA19756@linux1>
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>
<20131204223152.GA19756@linux1>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 17:36:37 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJ0EP43dRV8VQyBa=X_qEU_ESu1jhOVuANHEaRTKVN6VxP1PLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up
From: Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org>
To: Gentoo Dev <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: 30ea21e5-16e0-4d71-b3d5-92712a715ff9
X-Archives-Hash: b0ea3df6dca906998c0061674cc00e9d
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:31 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 04:30:30PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> 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?
>
> Personally, I don't know of one. Does anyone else?
>
Thinking on this further, the same logic could be applied to
sys-apps/openrc, and probably a few other packages that are not
build/toolchain critical. I suppose we need to draw a sanity line
somewhere. ^_^