On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 13:47 -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 06:33:53PM +0100, James Hogarth wrote:
> > On 17 May 2017 4:35 pm, "Peter Robinson" <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Matthew Miller
> > <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 09:15:51AM +0100, James Hogarth wrote:
> > > > On 17 May 2017 at 08:46, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > m> wrote:
> > > > > Converting apps from nettools to iproute is often non-trivial
> > > > > piece
> > > > > of work. As such isn't really something Fedora package
> > > > > maintainers
> > > > > should look to undertake as the risk of introducing
> > > > > regressions is
> > > > > non-negligible. Bug reports really need to go the
> > > > > corresponding
> > > > > upstream communities to get anything done.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's a sensible position and one I can respect. I do wonder
> > > > how much
> > > > is upstream and how much is a result of packaging though, that
> > > > itself
> > > > might be an interesting investigation.
> > >
> > > I think this might be something that rises to the level of a
> > > Change ("Officially Deprecate net-tools in Fedora"), and while
> > > working
> > > with upstreams is going to be necessary, I think having a Fedora
> > > tracker could be useful, if you're interested in putting in that
> > > effort.
> >
> > Yes, there was already an effort to do this 6 years ago [1] which
> > got
> > some of the way there. I don't think the package itself will go
> > away
> > any time soon but it would be good to not need it in the core
> > distribution. For a while we actually managed to do that but it's
> > crept back in over time. I think a focus on getting things like
> > cloud-init, vpnc-script, pki-server and similar packages that ship
> > in
> > core deliverables would be a good start.
> >
> > > > At the very least it may be worth checking for upstream bugs,
> > > > filing
> > > > them where they don't exist, and then filing a bugzilla (even
> > > > with a
> > > > tracking bug perhaps? Is this something for FPC to discuss
> > > > maybe?)
> > > > ticket linked to the upstream.
> > >
> > > Probably FESCo rather than FPC, unless we're going to ban
> > > depending on
> > > net-tools or something like that.
> >
> > Yes, it would definitely be FESCo over FPC IMO
> >
> > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=687920
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Well I'm ready to put my virtual money where my virtual mouth is :)
> >
> > In the next couple of weeks I'll get the ticket and tracking bug in
> > place
> > with bugs on the relevant packages linked to it.
> >
> > If FESCo think it needs a Change as well I'll get that in place.
> >
> > We may not get all the way... But I think it'd be good to make a
> > start and
> > see just how far we can get.
> >
> > It was pointed out to me off list that bridge-utils is in a similar
> > situation... But I think it's best to focus on just net-tools first
> > and
> > then we can take the next step separately when ready.
>
> Here is a list of binary commands in net-tools:
>
> /usr/bin/netstat
> /usr/sbin/arp
> /usr/sbin/ether-wake
> /usr/sbin/ifconfig
> /usr/sbin/ipmaddr
> /usr/sbin/iptunnel
> /usr/sbin/mii-diag
> /usr/sbin/mii-tool
> /usr/sbin/nameif
> /usr/sbin/plipconfig
> /usr/sbin/route
> /usr/sbin/slattach
>
> I don't mind removing dependencies on net-tools, as long as there
> still exists these commands in the default install:
>
> netstat
> arp
> ifconfig
> route
>
> I consider those to be a basic part of the user interface of any
> Linux/UNIX system--there is too much historical precedent and
> documentation to remove them IMO. It would be like trying to remove
> "ls" just because there is a newer/better way to list files.
I generally agree , but what are the replacement ? that is "the"
important information .
Cheers,
--
Sérgio M. B.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
