From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-fx0-f47.google.com ([209.85.161.47]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OMR54-0005uv-VA for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 21:36:57 +0200 Received: by fxm9 with SMTP id 9so4013773fxm.6 for ; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 12:32:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=YhXnAMPl3E/cQGiJXzBndb6ZP0IA6BK1ZK0M55nDwBU=; b=mW05oMInNYqziTdfym7ashUJyh3SJew7BXUtXX9yyPXWw3vh5qvWJszmovtfNezUp6 iwfyRdfCD5GW4Uuxk1VfaGU9ZEWm58/pYuE6ev0bP7rxhXf37GTpRjgQ4amIo2sFks2b w67Z03CwQ+7dK9+Uq9fyXtEFTnS1PY2Dj+448= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=a4PYATehWNhBZqCzJAMOL+ffYiwqOI/TaN0pLXmWH4687Lv2VNV6eZ2zckbkYD1lR+ yUziSFh7NETPPVxhcxN7scKUbP3k1xO0LlewF9p3u08Z5CjXwmfbqsGqP0BgKps65UdQ vsYMA8YwLRAz0dGYmTYjcCOoOMCVAGcFqr8JE= Received: by 10.223.24.130 with SMTP id v2mr18323823fab.61.1276111952874; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 12:32:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from s42.loc (85-127-249-17.dynamic.xdsl-line.inode.at [85.127.249.17]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y12sm5311130faj.17.2010.06.09.12.32.31 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 09 Jun 2010 12:32:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cow by s42.loc with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OMR10-0001T8-Qn; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 21:32:42 +0200 Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 21:32:42 +0200 From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Message-ID: <20100609193242.GR14941@mx.loc> References: <19c1b8a91002212154y766540d9vb091badff1198e0e@mail.gmail.com> <1276103437-2755-4-git-send-email-rep.dot.nop@gmail.com> <1276109098.4424.9.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> <20100609185240.GP14941@mx.loc> <1276111093.4424.21.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1276111093.4424.21.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.161.47 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: rep.dot.nop@gmail.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] busybox: picking IPv6 per default is not up to the package X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 19:36:58 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 08:18:13PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: >On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 20:52 +0200, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 07:44:58PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: >> >On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 19:10 +0200, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: >> >> diff --git a/recipes/busybox/busybox-1.15.3/micro/defconfig b/recipes/busybox/busybox-1.15.3/micro/defconfig >> >> index 8431d19..f6eaa6d 100644 >> >> --- a/recipes/busybox/busybox-1.15.3/micro/defconfig >> >> +++ b/recipes/busybox/busybox-1.15.3/micro/defconfig >> >> @@ -608,7 +608,7 @@ CONFIG_TIME=y >> >> # >> >> # Networking Utilities >> >> # >> >> -CONFIG_FEATURE_IPV6=y >> >> +# CONFIG_FEATURE_IPV6 is not set >> >> CONFIG_FEATURE_PREFER_IPV4_ADDRESS=y >> >> # CONFIG_VERBOSE_RESOLUTION_ERRORS is not set >> >> # CONFIG_ARP is not set >> > >> >This change doesn't look very desirable to me. What's the reason for >> >it? >> >> As long as you don't have ipv6 in distro features somehow, ipv6 will >> not be available. See introductory message of this series. > >Ah, so you're saying that ipv6 is missing from micro's DISTRO_FEATURES? yes, like from any other distro, and like ipv4 or nls etc.. >If that's the case then it's just a bug: presumably it's been harmless >in the past because very few packages care about it. Irrespective of >that, the intended behaviour is that micro should be IPv6-enabled and >turning it off in busybox does not seem like a good idea. > >Actually, a quick "grep -ri ipv6" in conf/distro didn't turn up any >matches at all exactly. Thus my RFC for feature/dep handling heuristics. > so enabling IPv6 by DISTRO_FEATURES doesn't seem to be >terribly well entrenched at the moment. If it were to be introduced >then I suspect it would need to be a negative property (i.e. the feature >would be "no ipv6") in order to not break all the existing distros. I disagree. Distros should be fixed to ask for or require a feature if they require it. For a nice way to flag packages with HANDLED_FEATURES, see conversation with kergoth from today, around 18:00 UTC.