conf/104884: Add support EtherChannel configuration to rc.conf

[Florent Thoumie]

The following reply was made to PR conf/104884; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Florent Thoumie <flz at FreeBSD.org>
To: Doug Barton <dougb at FreeBSD.org>
Cc: Brooks Davis <brooks at freebsd.org>, 
 Norikatsu Shigemura <nork at freebsd.org>,
  freebsd-bugs at freebsd.org,  FreeBSD-gnats-submit at freebsd.org, 
 freebsd-rc at freebsd.org
Subject: Re: conf/104884: Add support EtherChannel configuration to rc.conf
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:46:51 +0000

 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
 --------------enigEB8CC80FB262C2C8C1201611
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 Doug Barton wrote:
 > Florent Thoumie wrote:
 >> Brooks Davis wrote:
 >>> On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 04:14:50PM +0000, Florent Thoumie wrote:
 >>>> Norikatsu Shigemura wrote:
 >>>>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:10:18 GMT
 >>>>> FreeBSD-gnats-submit at FreeBSD.org wrote:
 >>>>>> Thank you very much for your problem report.
 >>>>>> It has the internal identification `conf/104884'.
 >>>>>> The individual assigned to look at your
 >>>>>> report is: freebsd-bugs. You can access the state of your problem
 >>>>>> report at any time
 >>>>>> via this link:
 >>>>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3D104884
 >>>>>>> Category:       conf
 >>>>>>> Responsible:    freebsd-bugs
 >>>>>>> Synopsis:       Add support EtherChannel configuration to rc.conf=
 
 >>>>>>> Arrival-Date:   Sat Oct 28 16:10:18 GMT 2006
 >>>>>     I chased HEAD.  Please see following patch.
 >>>>>     Anyone, please handle this PR?
 >>>>>     And I'll make a patch for 6-stable.
 >>>>>
 >>>> I've made my comments on this. Maybe someone else should review it?
 >>> It seems basicly fine and should be useful.  (At least until someone
 >>> finally shoots the netgraph part of ng_fec in the head.)  I'd like to=
 
 >>> see "" be the offical way to not configure any fec interfaces. gif_up=
 's
 >>> use of NO is a mistake (IMO).  It would be OK to allow "NO" as an
 >>> undocumented synanim for "".
 >>
 >> Agreed, as said in my previous post.
 >>
 >> I think we could just set gif_interfaces and fec_interfaces to "" in
 >> -CURRENT and add the "NO" compatibility in RELENG_6 when MFC time come=
 s?
 >> That would be a candidate for 7.0 RELNOTES.
 >>
 >> Does it make any sense to you?
 >=20
 > My instinct is to have it the other way around, with "NO" being the
 > default, and "" being a synonym. We've trained people that "NO" is the
 > way to turn things off with rc, and the one glaring exception to that
 > rule (sendmail) has caused an enormous amount of confusion over the yea=
 rs.
 >=20
 > Other than that, I have no objections here.
 
 IMHO, it makes sense to have "NO" as opposed to "YES". In this case,
 it's a list. So an empty list would be "", but keeping
 "NO"-compatibility for the -STABLE branch ensures POLA. At least that's
 how I see it.
 
 --=20
 Florent Thoumie
 flz at FreeBSD.org
 FreeBSD Committer
 
 
 --------------enigEB8CC80FB262C2C8C1201611
 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
 Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
 
 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
 Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)
 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
 
 iD8DBQFFx3uyMxEkbVFH3PQRCqhkAKCQBImTiFhsraqP5cUh45Y/C5MIhACeJupV
 NYtNF9lLKx9vyWC+JZHSr0E=
 =HVOK
 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
 --------------enigEB8CC80FB262C2C8C1201611--