From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-63713-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 88F70138247
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 10:36:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 22CD3E0996;
Sun, 1 Dec 2013 10:36:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-oa0-f52.google.com (mail-oa0-f52.google.com [209.85.219.52])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C675E096B
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 10:36:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id h16so11881770oag.39
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 02:36:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type;
bh=nguI6d90cgTX1HNgTpgBevBEZgInGEXXyEBdSEuo5NA=;
b=Cxt6XCwG9l/GNA6QXBljkX+K3jZYm0/XvbfjMtTPBJPqacqx60MSf5gKMaywEA05dK
EMzctO+srMDCfIrVlH2EEK7MZsX6uKfiJw2NpR1GARk73l1ORl12yRqL6cdmlwDQj9iz
076VFT77zd9cj4hC/XLzbVlX/5h/xfsj+/dArpPyNSFz+XGbGJT8XIIdjPwqm9mBu4E+
9xQUU2QgVJbcvS3/HYh6a6+cHhTPs+MuNoX5JX5nQvDq5frFd2ICGS5kChcrOS35HFQj
rJJbwh7sp94P2+rsQ6Cy0OG4zIXYgsEbMKwOiS7OJ+tos6POBZ30yVTseMSq33kUXGSH
by7g==
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 10.182.213.97 with SMTP id nr1mr676594obc.48.1385894191364;
Sun, 01 Dec 2013 02:36:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.60.137.234 with HTTP; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 02:36:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.60.137.234 with HTTP; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 02:36:31 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20131201102015.GA1219@egeo>
References: <20131201102015.GA1219@egeo>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 14:36:31 +0400
Message-ID: <CAO-1Pb6+r-Dc5xaduoeTk5zmsTKRqkO2RxmT8z_Hmb0B7caivw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up
From: Alexander V Vershilov <alexander.vershilov@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c20afcf9007304ec76a2f8
X-Archives-Salt: f2f301fa-31e6-4f45-a3aa-0379e0089c8e
X-Archives-Hash: f7f963405f5af8826ab56332443e89d3
--001a11c20afcf9007304ec76a2f8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
The only one unclear case is 4 (+netifrc +newnet) in this case stack that
is used is set by enabling required stack by rc-update. Case 3 means that
openrc doesn't provide default network stack and it's up to user which
stack to use (e.g. NM), so no problem here.
Also +netifrc flag is temporal to make update path clean and it may be
removed in future.
On Dec 1, 2013 2:20 PM, "Alessandro DE LAURENZIS" <just22.adl@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I've just upgraded to the latest openrc version; I was aware of the
> netifrc USE flag introduction
> (http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/user/275748). But so far
> the presence of the newnet flag was actually a "switch" between the old
> and the new network stack, given that one of the two should (must?) be
> added in any case.
> Now the presence of both netifrc and newnet could make a bit of
> confusion, particularly from a user perspective. We have of course 4
> cases; two of them are clear:
> 1) netifrc -newnet: "legacy" network stack;
> 2) -netifrc newnet: "new" network stack.
>
> The other two cases need a clarification:
> 3) -netifrc -newnet: no network stack?!?
> 4) netifrc newnet: ???
>
> This should be definitely documented somewhere (I didn't find anything).
>
> And, the last question: what's the point to have two flags instead the
> good old one?
>
> Thanks for any clarification.
>
> --
> Alessandro DE LAURENZIS
> [mailto:just22.adl@gmail.com]
> LinkedIn: http://it.linkedin.com/in/delaurenzis
>
>
--001a11c20afcf9007304ec76a2f8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p dir=3D"ltr"> The only one unclear case is 4 (+netifrc +newnet) in this c=
ase stack that is used is set by enabling required stack by rc-update. Case=
3 means that openrc doesn't provide default network stack and it's=
up to user which stack to use (e.g. NM), so no problem here.<br>
Also +netifrc flag is temporal to make update path clean and it may be remo=
ved in future.<br>
</p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Dec 1, 2013 2:20 PM, "Alessandro DE LAUR=
ENZIS" <<a href=3D"mailto:just22.adl@gmail.com">just22.adl@gmail.co=
m</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I've just upgraded to the latest openrc version; I was aware of the<br>
netifrc USE flag introduction<br>
(<a href=3D"http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/user/275748" targe=
t=3D"_blank">http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/user/275748</a>).=
But so far<br>
the presence of the newnet flag was actually a "switch" between t=
he old<br>
and the new network stack, given that one of the two should (must?) be<br>
added in any case.<br>
Now the presence of both netifrc and newnet could make a bit of<br>
confusion, particularly from a user perspective. We have of course 4<br>
cases; two of them are clear:<br>
1) netifrc -newnet: "legacy" network stack;<br>
2) -netifrc newnet: "new" network stack.<br>
<br>
The other two cases need a clarification:<br>
3) -netifrc -newnet: no network stack?!?<br>
4) netifrc newnet: ???<br>
<br>
This should be definitely documented somewhere (I didn't find anything)=
.<br>
<br>
And, the last question: what's the point to have two flags instead the<=
br>
good old one?<br>
<br>
Thanks for any clarification.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Alessandro DE LAURENZIS<br>
[mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:just22.adl@gmail.com">just22.adl@gmail.com</a>]<b=
r>
LinkedIn: <a href=3D"http://it.linkedin.com/in/delaurenzis" target=3D"_blan=
k">http://it.linkedin.com/in/delaurenzis</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote></div>
--001a11c20afcf9007304ec76a2f8--