From nobody Sun Sep 29 14:24:44 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4XGmgS0Td7z5Xklf for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2024 14:24:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from void@f-m.fm) Received: from fout-a6-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a6-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.149]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4XGmgQ75RQz4cny for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2024 14:24:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from void@f-m.fm) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=f-m.fm header.s=fm2 header.b=yQy1JDEk; dkim=pass header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm2 header.b=N+wrwpzi; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of void@f-m.fm designates 103.168.172.149 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=void@f-m.fm; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=f-m.fm Received: from phl-compute-09.internal (phl-compute-09.phl.internal [10.202.2.49]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60A9E1380161 for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2024 10:24:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-01 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-09.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 29 Sep 2024 10:24:46 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=f-m.fm; h=cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1727619886; x=1727706286; bh=e1l91ZHxrE gSaxA9zOSDi6qxpOPqO55/618pJywq8gI=; b=yQy1JDEk4KssEJk/RHUhsiat2E Z6PfUeJMOMktchuiOOh1/kgv8/7r8cUwEzUqWKXMsDsAJHQtrz9iBXI88SyRg++L PTa6uV3BGM/y2WQ/8dL7Ky1TcG0afOnjd/uQJDHuI12UcUj08upVnDVdAwL89q87 PauL6mpAUX41/VWU9xnHUsG5MwRrHb2mWfWk1GBux3yywrTbwtBQbBadh5mY9hTk bxgOjS4thdzizNoxdKA4XGnFgDZRc724YRvKckNI7C0a/zYSyXEa5NrEjmRLE1Ed yCnsPkW1E0dYwX6NvwGUxjoUX5SUKy/z0FgcBk9573re2cnudi7sC3dcaZDQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1727619886; x=1727706286; bh=e1l91ZHxrEgSaxA9zOSDi6qxpOPq O55/618pJywq8gI=; b=N+wrwpziDHedOjtYawKbj0XrQ0CFsHFbHIklN6v9elMp z/34wzZg5/NqyIjejIyd5gg2zvtYmBAe9KZh0rpowUg0x1QSrO+K7gdl6m+l5Jfo NGEsid23j/fDv73m/W4knDbn81VhKjv0HcK7Gdb0NwLBHz7k5mIsKeT8noXSW9Pz p7VOomrLw3p43lo6KapXn2ZvTIxV51bay1TxZW8G5FydFIY+RMPLQTKwneOVb5OG PdTkx+P7s6mpMs94VaIffVYpOAQCzArdPEDyR1lZewB19tgLf3NYqYg0FtnHmOa2 FhT5vI4TsLD0BX2+FbZbo1Fv0K9aeCv3Hlo/1N/lwg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrvddufedgjeelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvuf fkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvhhoihguuceovhhoihgusehfqdhm rdhfmheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepkeeluddvlefhieelfefggffhffektdehleelgf dugfdvgeekjeejuddtheehgfeunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghm pehmrghilhhfrhhomhepvhhoihgusehfqdhmrdhfmhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepuddpmh houggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepfhhrvggvsghsugdqtghurhhrvghnthes fhhrvggvsghsugdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i2541463c:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2024 10:24:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2024 15:24:44 +0100 From: void To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is INET6 a required option these days? (kernel build failure) Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <4E5CBF78-A9AC-4D1C-9D81-CB379C408468@FreeBSD.org> <01A54634-1A79-4B52-96C4-88253725910C@freebsd.org> <20240929161301.2cea8a36@ernst.home> List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240929161301.2cea8a36@ernst.home> X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.60 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.998]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[f-m.fm,none]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[f-m.fm:s=fm2,messagingengine.com:s=fm2]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:103.168.172.128/27]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[103.168.172.149:from]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[f-m.fm]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[f-m.fm]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[messagingengine.com:dkim]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[f-m.fm:+,messagingengine.com:+]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org]; ASN(0.00)[asn:209242, ipnet:103.168.172.0/24, country:US]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_HAS_QUESTION(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4XGmgQ75RQz4cny X-Spamd-Bar: --- On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 02:13:01PM +0000, Gary Jennejohn wrote: >I personally have been using a customized kernel configuration file for >25 years or more and I have no intention of changing it. > >Just because INET6 shows up in all the boilerplate config files doesn't >change the fact that INET6 is still an option. I've always thought inet6 stuff was needed by some internal processes even if not explicitly enabled. i tried ages ago disabling it all and various things broke inexplicably, even though I wasn't using it and it wasn't allowed at the firewall. So, it's like an option, from what I can gather, but a compulsory one ;) I think I'd consider disabling it again if i were making something like nanobsd. --