Thanks for the insight, Jo. Inline:
On 2024-04-03 01:12, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> For interface type parameters, the man page documents patterns:
>> ```
>> *,!eth*,!!eth1
>>
>> uses all interfaces, except interfaces starting with "eth",
>> but including "eth1".
>> ```
>
> at some point, uci configuration was meant to provide a somewhat sane config
> abstraction over various damon specific native configurations, now I see the
> recurring trend to expose every last native config idiosyncrasy as-is in uci.
I guess that's what people want. More power, and ease, out of the box. Adapt or
die.
It would seem you have not yet read the man page for lldpd...
>
> Is there really a need to support these weird micro formats in uci? The uci
> config for lldpd should deal with logical interface names and translate them
> into layer 2 ones as needed. People requiring complex, hand-tuned settings
> probably want to bypass uci entirly and simply start lldpd with a static
> native config file.
>
Try saying the same thing about the kernel.
With this philosophy, it's like we aim for the 50th percentile. Everybody's
needs differ, which is how openwrt has acquired endless patches and grown.
I do not see this is as an idiosyncrasy, it's standard behaviour in a number of
other systems. The cost to handle it is, as we see from the code, low, while
still retaining the original behaviour ("deal with logical interface names and
translate them into layer 2 ones as needed.").
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
