Qrux wrote: > For 7.2 & beyond... > > Bridge-utils is not dissimilar from udev, in that it's a userspace > tool for a kernel. And, it's certainly no less optional than > inettools.
I disagree -- assuming by "inettools" you mean "inetutils", because the former is not in LFS. hostname is required for X (it runs "hostname -f" at startup), and ping/traceroute/telnet are extremely useful when debugging broken networking. But brctl is utterly useless, *unless* you're running a bridge. (Or you're trying to create firmware for a switch, which is just a larger-than-two-devices bridge.) I doubt most people are doing either of those two things. > Ethtool is the same story...another userspace kernel tool to inspect > hardware. It replaces mii-tool, now deprecated. There is no ethtool package in either BLFS or LFS, and no mention of an ethtool binary in any of the other packages either (at least as far as Google will tell me). mii-tool is not in LFS either, ever since net-tools got ripped out, several versions ago. > So, I propose bridge-utils and ethtool be moved into LFS. For the reasons above, I disagree. At least on bridge-utils, though ethtool doesn't even exist in BLFS, so that's pushing it too I think.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
