Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:15:22 +0100 From: "Kristof Provost" <kp@FreeBSD.org> To: "Li-Wen Hsu" <lwhsu@freebsd.org> Cc: "Baptiste Daroussin" <bapt@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, freqlabs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: libifconfig non-private in 13? Message-ID: <E3CCD123-BA7C-4B4C-82F5-DE8196FCF2D3@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAKBkRUzV2EAhFUD%2B=Gcn6zkEuzVJO_t8V2SSWowkr2XeFDdzKg@mail.gmail.com> References: <1EB6D7ED-F370-42EA-AC66-93D8BC96F29C@FreeBSD.org> <20201226211810.g4ll4ow23fitmxdo@ivaldir.net> <CAKBkRUzV2EAhFUD%2B=Gcn6zkEuzVJO_t8V2SSWowkr2XeFDdzKg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 26 Dec 2020, at 22:33, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: > On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 5:18 AM Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> > wrote: >> >> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 09:02:00PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Libifconfig was marked as private (and experimental) back in 2016. >>> It’s since made some strides and has grown a few users. Ifconfig >>> now depends >>> on it as well. >>> >>> While it’s far from finished it’d be more useful for some users >>> if it were >>> public. That would at least imply some level of API/ABI stability, >>> which is >>> why I’m bringing it up here before pulling the trigger. >>> >>> Does anyone see any reasons to not do this? >>> >> >> I would go the otherway around, any reason to make it public yet? if >> yes they go >> ahead, if no keep it private ;) > > I would say it is nice to have some scripting language bindings to it, > although I'm not sure if this is possible and a feasible usage. > I’m sure it’s possible. Ryan actually done some of that work: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D25447 Maybe we should merge that too. Best regards, Kristof
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E3CCD123-BA7C-4B4C-82F5-DE8196FCF2D3>