From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 8 11:32:58 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FF8516A4CE; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 11:32:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from telecom.net.et (sparrow.telecom.net.et [213.55.64.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D1B843D5E; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 11:32:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mtm@identd.net) Received: from [213.55.68.75] (HELO rogue.smit.lan) by telecom.net.et (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.8) with ESMTP id 65377456; Wed, 08 Dec 2004 14:25:19 +0300 Received: by rogue.smit.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 549BBB811; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 14:32:54 +0300 (EAT) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 14:32:53 +0300 From: Mike Makonnen To: "Ralf S. Engelschall" Message-ID: <20041208113253.GA28492@rogue.smit.lan> References: <200412052145.iB5LjbRD019745@repoman.freebsd.org> <20041206112604.GA5825@rogue.acs.lan> <20041206191549.GA38708@engelschall.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041206191549.GA38708@engelschall.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD/6.0-CURRENT (i386) cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: Pawel Jakub Dawidek cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc network.subr X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 11:32:58 -0000 On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 08:15:50PM +0100, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: > Are you sure? I cannot see where this should be present in 5-STABLE > (RELENG_5)? Pawel added it just recently to CURRENT (HEAD)'s > network.subr in order to support the ifnet_rename() function. 5-STABLE's > network.subr doesn't contain this. I think you are intermixing this > with the fact that if list_net_interfaces() is called _without any_ > arguments, it (still) does a similar thing than the removed "all". This > functionality was not touched here. Pawel just removed the explicit > "all" feature which had output a little bit more than the current > no-argument usage. I stand corrected. Sorry for jumping the gun. Cheers. -- Mike Makonnen | GPG-KEY: http://www.identd.net/~mtm/mtm.asc mtm@identd.net | Fingerprint: AC7B 5672 2D11 F4D0 EBF8 5279 5359 2B82 7CD4 1F55 mtm@FreeBSD.Org| FreeBSD - Unleash the Daemon !