From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 14 22:24:26 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org 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 EB66816A41C; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:24:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [66.127.85.87]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7111043D49; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:24:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from [66.127.85.91] ([66.127.85.91]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6EMOOms095674 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 14 Jul 2005 15:24:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Message-ID: <42D6E749.2030204@errno.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 15:29:29 -0700 From: Sam Leffler User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050327) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Watson References: <200507141833.j6EIXLPA001703@repoman.freebsd.org> <42D6DD30.6020900@errno.com> <20050714224327.O35071@fledge.watson.org> <42D6E001.1020001@errno.com> <20050714225706.Q35071@fledge.watson.org> <42D6E50D.6000606@errno.com> <20050714231920.K35071@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20050714231920.K35071@fledge.watson.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/ifconfig ifconfig.8 ifconfig.c ifconfig.h ifieee80211.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:24:27 -0000 Robert Watson wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Sam Leffler wrote: > >> You didn't point out keys were being printed on boot (so it goes in >> /var/log/messages etc.). In that case I'm fine with this change. > > > I was sure I had pointed that out, but then, I think I had also decided > that you thought it was better to take printing of the key entirely out > of ifconfig(8) than to add a "-k", hence thinking that adding "-k" was a > more reasonable middle ground. Obviously, there was some > misunderstanding going on, and largely on my part. > > Thanks, It was a while ago but don't recall you saying it. Regardless, thanks too. Sam