Re: [gentoo-dev] RC_STRICT_NET_CHECKING or the net dependency

[Mike Frysinger]

On Sunday 22 October 2006 07:52, Roy Marples wrote:
> OK, from my persepective we had  RC_STRICT_NET_CHECKING because we couldn't
> previously handle multiple provides. Here's how the new way translates.

i use it because i want to disable most net based requirements ... my machines 
all use this:

> lo - net is up if lo is up
> Just have net.lo in the boot runlevel - it should always be there anyway.

so you're saying if net.lo is in the boot runlevel, and i put say net.eth0 
[wired] and net.eth1 [wireless] into my default runlevel, i dont have to 
worry about eth0/eth1 screwing up my net services ?

for example, if i start stopping/starting net.eth[01], i certainly dont want 
sshd/tftpd/rsyncd/etc... starting and stopping as well ... nor do i want 
these services to fail because net.eth[01] failed to start at boot

thus RC_STRICT_NET_CHECKING=lo gave me the perfect behavior
-mike