On 09/20/2010 07:06 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> I guess quite a good solution for now might be enabling newnet through
> an USE flag, being masked in the profile by default. That would satisfy
> the oldnet compatibility requirement for users, while the small group
> preferring newnet could still benefit from it.
> 

This pretty-much guarantees that arch testers/etc will end up testing it
one way or the other, and not both.  That could lead to QA issues when
packages work fine for some users and not for others.

Granted, this is mainly a concern for lower-level network-config related
apps.

I'd hate to be the maintainer of an ebuild that needs to take into
account multiple network configuration options.

I still haven't heard a good reason as to why we need two.  I'm running
oldnet (baselayout-1), and changing to newnet would be a pain, but I
don't expect the distro to take this into account for my sake when
making decisions like this.  I'm sure people running newnet feel similarly.

The only argument I've heard for newnet is that it is more DHCP-friendly
or something like that (not that DHCP is required).  However, I've never
found getting DHCP to work particularly difficult - it practically comes
like that by default (just emerge dhcpcd and add the interface to your
init.d).  I imagine wireless might be more complex.

One argument I've heard against newnet is that you can't bring
individual interfaces up and down.  That sounds like a potential
drawback.  Granted, most of the sorts of things that I'd like to
conditionally bring up (vpn, ipv6 tunnel, etc) probably won't use the
network scripts anyway.

Rich

Reply via email to