-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 11/18/11 12:50, Doug Barton wrote: > On 11/18/2011 12:45, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote: >> Xin, good day. >> >> Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:38:31PM -0800, Xin LI wrote: >>> Is there any counter reasoning about "having an interface >>> marked as non-DHCP is not an error"? I'm still not convinced >>> with the benefit of having it show an error message. >> >> Well, when I invoke 'service dhclient start em0' and em0 isn't >> DHCP-enabled, I want to see some diagnostics on why I was not >> able to get DHCP on that interface. Return code isn't that >> visible (I can, of course, always run it as 'service dhclient >> start em0 || echo failed'), but I am not up to typing more than >> needed and I should see the real reason for absence of >> DHCP-assigned address in that case, be it the non-DHCP-enabled >> interface or some other problem. > > Right, that's my argument as well. > > If there is a particular code path that leads to attempting > dhclient on a non-dhcp interface I'd rather see that code path > fixed than to suppress the warning.
Do you have any objection to rea@'s version of patch? I think it's sensible that quietstart shouldn't issue this type of warnings. Cheers, - -- Xin LI <[email protected]> https://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! Live free or die -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJOxsoCAAoJEATO+BI/yjfB7WMH/iGw2An8lFBSdDYlHhwvmypK Dy5UPSy9EeRH8WEXkGT+m8pAQEoYgPTbuDCXekrOgicQyG4+1TxtTGncjGKKm7s/ ZiviK4Sl7l4zD0fqxMA9kJiaMGYslrLX8dRTfhbwO/lmweRk2Eg44ODDyla6SDI8 T/9pINNR7nBcOAWJltdY/ZtofQydj0EWLFX8v2xL0wBTS9DyLL9Bog878LEzfxYJ ddquA9Frea/8kMsS8sc48dZts1o6DwQ+9oQeOTsYfHqpHznekdNXlZgbkQQI/vYg rtMw0p6mC3jw6jpi+zWavI+IuOlzPstpipVZntl8h/sCq6ZCqL8VjXgE7Y+LBPw= =9v4a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-rc To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
