From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Sun Jul 29 17:24:22 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0148105BCD6 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58AAA881B7 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 19B0B105BCD5; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:22 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBC9C105BCD4 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 751A8881B5 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFB091806A for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w6THOKmn011274 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:20 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w6THOKqv011273 for bugs@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:20 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 226260] dhclient tells me $if is not dhcp-enabled even though it is Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:20 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: conf X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: jpicalau+freebsd_bugzilla@elmandria.com X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:24:23 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D226260 jpicalau+freebsd_bugzilla@elmandria.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jpicalau+freebsd_bugzilla@e | |lmandria.com --- Comment #1 from jpicalau+freebsd_bugzilla@elmandria.com --- I just found this report while in the process of figuring out the same issu= e. I figure I should just as well provide some details and findings. The reason why that configuration doesn't work when placed in /etc/rc.conf.d/netif is that the service that handles dhcp is dhclient, whi= ch goes and look for its configuration in /etc/rc.conf.d/dhclient. Now, both netif and dhclient will also load /etc/rc.conf.d/network. (`load_rc_config network' in both of those services file). However, there i= s a comment against this loading line in /etc/rc.d/netif stating that this is loaded for compatibility, which I interpret as meaning that it might not wo= rk forever. It seems like there is a more general issue with the /etc/rc.conf.d/ mechan= ism not being well-suited for handling variables used in network.subr. Any rc script including network.subr could start making use of a functionality that depends on one of those variables in the future and result in breakage for people having one of those set in /etc/rc.conf.d, but for another script. It would be good to get some clarity here in order to avoid such unexpected configuration issues. In the meanwhile, I think it is prudent to use /etc/rc.conf for any variable that ends up being "shared" between rc scripts in this fashion. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=