From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 28 21:25:27 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E947437B401; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 21:25:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05A1943F85; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 21:25:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.12.9/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h6T4P8FL005399; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:25:24 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:24:35 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20030728.222435.111545905.imp@bsdimp.com> To: nate@root.org From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20030728210833.P53955@root.org> References: <20030728142857.A41136@cvs.imp.ch> <20030729030426.GD8471@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030728210833.P53955@root.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: mb@imp.ch cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: obrien@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc/defaults rc.conf src/etc/rc.d dhclient X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 04:25:28 -0000 In message: <20030728210833.P53955@root.org> Nate Lawson writes: : On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, David O'Brien wrote: : > On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 02:34:03PM +0200, Martin Blapp wrote: : > > The problem here is that a box not connected to lan with dhcp hangs till : > > you press CTRL C. : > : > So? That is how DHCP works. I added the "-1" option so it will time : > out. Experience using SuSE which does background its dhcp client, I : > think this change is a mistake. Please back that part out. : : I agree that always backgrounding the client provides some more : complicated boot serialization and is not always desirable. However, I : don't see any reason why if there is no link dhclient should not : immediately go into the background or terminate if that makes you happier. : There is no timeout that is correct for "no link". Because it takes some small delta for the link to come up for many interfaces. The link is usually brought up as part of dhclient's processing. If you don't allow at least a small delta of time to pass before declaring no link, then you'll find that you have lots of issues as if you'd just kicked dhclient into the background. With these changes, I'll be able to plug my minipci card back into my dell :-) Warner