From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Oct  1 07:28:57 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2729D1065679
	for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Thu,  1 Oct 2009 07:28:57 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from ale@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from andxor.it (relay.andxor.it [195.223.2.3])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6A1A58FC16
	for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Thu,  1 Oct 2009 07:28:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 47522 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2009 07:28:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ale.andxor.it) (192.168.2.5)
	by andxor.it with SMTP; 1 Oct 2009 07:28:54 -0000
Message-ID: <4AC45A35.1070901@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 09:28:53 +0200
From: Alex Dupre <ale@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090624)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>
References: <20090930135327.83446wivezjxxlc8@webmail.leidinger.net>
	<4AC36719.3010607@FreeBSD.org>
	<20091001091513.11182ihiv60y2qyo@webmail.leidinger.net>
In-Reply-To: <20091001091513.11182ihiv60y2qyo@webmail.leidinger.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org>, current@FreeBSD.org,
	Brooks Davis <brooks@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: ifconfig_IF_aliasX regression
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 07:28:57 -0000

Alexander Leidinger ha scritto:
>> The change is recent, to unificate ipv4 and ipv6 rc code. We have
>> ipv4_addrs_IF that uses the former syntax, but why not ipv6_addrs_IF,
>> too?
> 
> Is this a question to me?

Of course, no :-)

> I already expected that this is some regression because of the IPv6
> changes, but still: intended or not? If yes -> missing UPDATING entry.

CCed hrs@ for this regression and brooks@ for the ipv4_addrs_IF change.

-- 
Alex Dupre