Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 19:59:37 +1100 From: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org> To: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@mahoroba.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IPv6 for ports, automaticly enable it or not? Message-ID: <20020126195937.J825@k7.mavetju.org> In-Reply-To: <ygezo34gevc.wl@piano.mahoroba.org>; from ume@mahoroba.org on Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 08:36:23PM %2B0900 References: <20020123163021.A97184@k7.mavetju.org> <980340000.1011786243@volyn.coolrat.org> <20020124161554.G825@k7.mavetju.org> <yge3d0wi0np.wl@piano.mahoroba.org> <20020124211910.H825@k7.mavetju.org> <ygezo34gevc.wl@piano.mahoroba.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 08:36:23PM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 24 Jan 2002 21:19:10 +1100
> >>>>> Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org> said:
>
> edwin> So you suggest that every package (with possible IPv6 support) will
> edwin> have to get two entries in the ports-collection?
>
> No, basically one package should work for IPv6 as well as IPv4. I
> believe most IPv6 aware applications are also IPv4 friendly. However,
> some applications break IPv4. Mozilla and Apache are typical case.
After re-reading of emails I think I didn't make myself clear in
the first place: I'm looking for an uniform way to enable IPv6
support in ports which support it.
There are a couple of items which have been brought up regarding this:
- trying to make one package if possible to support both IPv4 and IPv6
- some ports don't like to be mixed (www/mozilla and www/apache)
- for some ports the patches are too long in between (ftp/wget)
- some ports don't work correctly if IPv6 is compiled in but no
IPv6 connection exists (mail/courier)
There is only one person who knows if IPv6 support is needed or
not: the administrator of the box.
At this moment:
How can he make sure he is using an IPv4-only enabled package?
- using the "plain" version, i.e. not the +ipv6 one. (most likely)
How can he make the IPv4-only enabled port?
- using the "plain" version, i.e. not the +ipv6 one. (most likely)
How can he make sure he is using an IPv6 enabled package?
- using the +ipv6 version
- using the "plain" version and pray
How can he make the IPv6 enabled port?
- using the +ipv6 version
- using the "plain" version and pray
If there are is a knob for explicitely enabling IPv6 support, you will get:
How can he make sure he is using an IPv4-only enabled package?
- using the "plain" version, i.e. not the +ipv6 one.
How can he make the IPv4-only enable ports?
- by removing the WITH_IPV6 statement of make.conf and make
the "plain" version
How can he make sure he is using an IPv6 enabled package?
- using the +ipv6 version
How can he make the IPv6 enabled port?
- using the +ipv6 version
- adding the WITH_IPV6 statement to make.conf and make the
"plain" version.
That eliminated the two "pray"s and two "most likely"s, but it also
disabled to support for IPv6 in the "plain" packages.
Is that first thing a good thing? Yes.
Is that last thing a good thing? No.
Is it better than what we have now? Yes.
Why? A uniform way of defining that IPv6 should be enabled
if the application supports it.
Maybe I'm seeing it totally wrong and can it be solved a different
way. In that case, please tell me (maybe again, I might not have
picked it up the first time)
Edwin
--
Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.MavEtJu.org
edwin@mavetju.org | Interested in MUDs? Visit Fatal Dimensions:
------------------+ http://www.FatalDimensions.org/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020126195937.J825>