Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:46:51 +0000
From:      Florent Thoumie <flz@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org, Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org>, freebsd-rc@freebsd.org, Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: conf/104884: Add support EtherChannel configuration to rc.conf
Message-ID:  <45C77B9B.20403@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <45C77AFD.1050801@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <20061029010934.5afef73e.nork@FreeBSD.org> <200610281610.k9SGAIVb051055@freefall.freebsd.org> <20070129000459.b2dba4e0.nork@FreeBSD.org> <45C757FA.2000209@FreeBSD.org> <20070205163646.GB48768@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <45C75E1F.2070709@FreeBSD.org> <45C77AFD.1050801@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigEB8CC80FB262C2C8C1201611
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Doug Barton wrote:
> Florent Thoumie wrote:
>> Brooks Davis wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 04:14:50PM +0000, Florent Thoumie wrote:
>>>> Norikatsu Shigemura wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:10:18 GMT
>>>>> FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org wrote:
>>>>>> Thank you very much for your problem report.
>>>>>> It has the internal identification `conf/104884'.
>>>>>> The individual assigned to look at your
>>>>>> report is: freebsd-bugs. You can access the state of your problem
>>>>>> report at any time
>>>>>> via this link:
>>>>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3D104884
>>>>>>> Category:       conf
>>>>>>> Responsible:    freebsd-bugs
>>>>>>> Synopsis:       Add support EtherChannel configuration to rc.conf=

>>>>>>> Arrival-Date:   Sat Oct 28 16:10:18 GMT 2006
>>>>>     I chased HEAD.  Please see following patch.
>>>>>     Anyone, please handle this PR?
>>>>>     And I'll make a patch for 6-stable.
>>>>>
>>>> I've made my comments on this. Maybe someone else should review it?
>>> It seems basicly fine and should be useful.  (At least until someone
>>> finally shoots the netgraph part of ng_fec in the head.)  I'd like to=

>>> see "" be the offical way to not configure any fec interfaces. gif_up=
's
>>> use of NO is a mistake (IMO).  It would be OK to allow "NO" as an
>>> undocumented synanim for "".
>>
>> Agreed, as said in my previous post.
>>
>> I think we could just set gif_interfaces and fec_interfaces to "" in
>> -CURRENT and add the "NO" compatibility in RELENG_6 when MFC time come=
s?
>> That would be a candidate for 7.0 RELNOTES.
>>
>> Does it make any sense to you?
>=20
> My instinct is to have it the other way around, with "NO" being the
> default, and "" being a synonym. We've trained people that "NO" is the
> way to turn things off with rc, and the one glaring exception to that
> rule (sendmail) has caused an enormous amount of confusion over the yea=
rs.
>=20
> Other than that, I have no objections here.

IMHO, it makes sense to have "NO" as opposed to "YES". In this case,
it's a list. So an empty list would be "", but keeping
"NO"-compatibility for the -STABLE branch ensures POLA. At least that's
how I see it.

--=20
Florent Thoumie
flz@FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD Committer


--------------enigEB8CC80FB262C2C8C1201611
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFx3uyMxEkbVFH3PQRCqhkAKCQBImTiFhsraqP5cUh45Y/C5MIhACeJupV
NYtNF9lLKx9vyWC+JZHSr0E=
=HVOK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enigEB8CC80FB262C2C8C1201611--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45C77B9B.20403>