From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 9 00:03:51 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0B0616A40A; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 00:03:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (grnl-static-02-0046.dsl.iowatelecom.net [69.66.56.110]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0436F13C4DE; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 00:01:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l19019Hi098797; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 18:01:09 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: (from brooks@localhost) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l19019fx098796; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 18:01:09 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from brooks) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 18:01:09 -0600 From: Brooks Davis To: Florent Thoumie Message-ID: <20070209000109.GA98754@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <20070205163646.GB48768@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <45C75E1F.2070709@FreeBSD.org> <45C77AFD.1050801@FreeBSD.org> <45C77B9B.20403@FreeBSD.org> <20070205190220.GA51379@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <45CB9C44.8010207@FreeBSD.org> <20070208224659.GA96852@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <45CBB2A1.706@FreeBSD.org> <20070208234737.GA98583@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <45CBB6B4.7050407@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45CBB6B4.7050407@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (lor.one-eyed-alien.net [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:01:09 -0600 (CST) Cc: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org, Doug Barton , freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, Norikatsu Shigemura , Brooks Davis , FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: conf/104884: Add support EtherChannel configuration to rc.conf X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 00:03:51 -0000 On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 11:48:04PM +0000, Florent Thoumie wrote: > Brooks Davis wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 11:30:41PM +0000, Florent Thoumie wrote: > >> Brooks Davis wrote: > >>> On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 01:55:16PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > >>>> Brooks Davis wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> The default should be an empty list which results in nothing happening. > >>>>> I'd suggest making empty list the value for the default gif_interfaces > >>>>> in /etc/defaults/rc.conf in both branches, removing support for NO in > >>>>> CURRENT and emitting a warning in stable. > >>>> How about issuing a warning for NO in both branches? Whether I agree > >>>> with you or not on the importance of keeping things clean and > >>>> consistent, I definitely do not want to err on the side of pedantry > >>>> over usability. > >>> That would be fine. I don't really care as long as it's deprecated. > >>> > >>> FWIW, only users who don't update /etc/defaults/rc.conf or who manually > >>> set gif_interfaces="NO" would be effected so the size of the set of > >>> effected users is probalby close to epilon and even all that will happen > >>> is cloning an extra interface and then not configuring it so it should > >>> be basicly harmless to just remove direct support for it. > >> Fine with me as well. Should we make it a warning on RELENG_6 and an > >> error on HEAD, or a warning on both. The former being be what I was > >> planning to do, ie. remove support for "NO" in HEAD but issue a message > >> saying semantics have changed. The latter would mean identical code in > >> both HEAD and RELENG_6 (so "NO"-compatibility in both branches), but > >> we'd need a reminder to remove this "NO"-support in HEAD once RELENG_7 > >> is branched. > > > > I'd say a warning in both. > > Re-reading Doug's message, he's probably thinking the same thing, but > this is for gif_interfaces only, right? That's what I'd do. There's no reason to introduce support for an instantly deprecated feature in a new variable, particularly since gif_interfaces is the odd one out. -- Brooks