On Tue, Dec 10, 2013, Steev Klimaszewski wrote: > On Tue, 2013-12-10, Rich Freeman wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013, Steev Klimaszewski wrote: > > > On Mon, 2013-12-09, Rich Freeman wrote: > > > You're thinking with your x86/amd64 hat on here. > > > > Actually, I probably just underquoted. I am well-aware that there are > > issues with ARM, hence my previous suggestion that it might make sense > > to vary this by profile. > > > > Definitely - but then we have to do everything in the profiles, and at > least for ARM, there are currently 6 profiles, and we're considering > introducing a 7th (neon), and we will need to add aarch64, which will be > at least 2 more. I suppose we could do it in the base arm profile...
I don't think it would make sense to remove networking from any profile. Far better to develop a 14 profile using dhcpcd and make that work, without affecting current users. The virtual could be used to add any higher layer desired, but would not be required. > > If it actually had collisions with other network managers I think > > there would be more of a case for removing it. > > > > After all, we stick openrc and portage (the PM) in the stage3 and you > > don't exactly need those in order to run Gentoo... Yup. Which is steev's "functional" point, so you seem to be in agreement. > While you don't need those specifically to run Gentoo, the point of the > stage3 is to have a workable base to start with. So people are very > much free to yank out openrc and put in, say, systemd, and rip out > portage and add in paludis, if they so choose, and make those available. > And from the traffic I've seen on the systemd list, it looks like they > are adding some sort of networking to systemd itself as well, so we > probably will need a virtual at some point. My specific point of the > email though, was you saying that a stage3 in general aren't functional > - but they are - they are the very base of a functional system, and you > simply add things on top, or replace things with your preferred methods. > A stage1 or a stage2 isn't particularly functional. Agreed. There's no real point in a stage3 that doesn't support some sort of networking. It's fine to change over, but again that should be done with a new profile, not by randomly removing netifrc USE default. The latter may not be "correct" on a purist level, but it's a darn sight better than breaking installs, and is only a transitional measure. The transition is much easier to handle as a profile change, for an end-user, and the experimental profile facilitates modification of base stages and working on them, without breaking the current setup. After all, if someone wants to setup a Gentoo install *without* networking they are very much doing a specialist thing, and can deal with it themselves. So I don't think we should give too much time to that use-case, in terms of implementation effort; staying out of the way when the user tells us to is all that's required, and that's easy: do nothing, or in this case, don't force any dependencies on higher-level network managers, unless required for correct functioning. Regards, steveL -- #friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)
