[Toybox] complaining about 'ifconfig' - better use 'ip'

[David Seikel]

On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 10:02:40 +0200 Bastian Bittorf
<bittorf at bluebottle.com> wrote:

> * Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> [05.04.2013 09:00]:
> > >this is wrong:
> > >lo:0 is no interface, so why does it show an extra interface?
> > 
> > I note that technically "lo" isn't an ethernet interface in the
> > first place, so you could make the same argument there...
> 
> ethernet or SLIP or lo doesnt matter. lo:0 belongs to lo and
> is not an separate interface. but your are right, this is only
> a small issue...
> 
> > 
> > >> >- more than one routing table ("policy routing")
> > >>
> > >> Never tried, but I've done some fun stuff with iptables and some
> > >
> > >so, because you never tried - it's not needed? 8-)
> > 
> > No, I'm saying I'm scratching my own itch and you complaining about
> > ifconfig does not trump other people submitting code to me and
> > complaining in email that they would be "very confused" if it was
> > removed because it's part of their patched version of toybox that
> > they're already using in a product.
> 
> i doubt somebody is using toybox in production today. thats the reason
> that i switched in: it's not too late for making it right. (when
> ifconfig is fully included, than we need to maintain both:
> ifconfig/arp/netstat/route and 'ip')
> 
> > won't use code from net-tools. Your complaints about horrible
> > infrastructure are mind-bogglingly irrelevant, it's gonna be a fresh
> > implementation. (At least when I get done with it...)
> 
> thats an important point and i agree.
> but if you/somebody creates something fresh, why warm-up old soup?
> 
> > >the idea behind it is:
> > >dont encourage people to use such old, incomplete, inconsistent
> > >tools.
> > 
> > 1) cat's older
> > 2) this should (eventually) be a fresh implementation
> > 3) we can add stuff until it's not incomplete
> > 4) you've never explained inconsistent, just asserted it. (No, I'm
> > not interested in hearing it at the moment. I'm experiencing topic
> > exhaustion.)
> 
> i did. it's inconsistent because you have different commands with
> different sytax / switches which are doing the same thing:
> manipulating network - nobody would implement two different
> cat-implementations for 'files' and 'devices'. it's the same, because
> it's the same kernel-interface.
> 
> > >so why not doing it right? is there any distro
> > >not shipping 'ip' (iproutw2)?
> > 
> > People made this argument for udev. I wrote mdev. This is the same
> > argument people are making right now for "systemd". I'm not doing
> > that one.
> 
> true and valid argument.
> 
> > 
> > >> >- you can rename interfaces
> > >>
> > >> man nameif
> > >>
> > >> >- multicast working
> > >>
> > >> I'm fairly certain multicast was around in the 90's. I remember
> > >> people bemoaning its failure even then. (How is the mbone doing?
> > >> Netflix streaming making extensive use of that, then? Skype?
> > >> Youtube?)
> > >
> > >multicast makes more sense in the ipv6 world
> > 
> > No it doesn't. I was working for a set top box manufacturer in 2001,
> 
> a lot of things have changed in IPv6 since then. i understand you
> arguments about this (and read the links). lets see in 5 years if
> somebody is using it, or if it silently dies...hard to say.
> 
> > (I care more about quality of the code than rapidly increasing the
> > feature set. All these commands already exist elsewhere, toybox
> > needs
> 
> thats the most important point and also the thing why i'am in.
> 
> i think from architecture view, its cleaner to implement 'ip' than
> fighting with all the syntax and output-issues of ifconfig.
> 
> so the question again: is ifconfig in androids-toolbox a dependency
> for any other program in android?

Instead of continually arguing your point, it would be much better if
you put your time into writing code.  There really is no point going on
and on and on and on and on about the ip command if there's no code.
Can't put the ip command into toybox if there's no code.  So far you
have not convinced anyone, which means no one else is going to write
it.  In fact I can see that others are getting annoyed at you, that's
no way to convince people either, quite the opposite.  Right now it's
best if you shut up and show us the code.

-- 
A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants
coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.landley.net/pipermail/toybox-landley.net/attachments/20130405/62ba325e/attachment-0004.pgp>