| 1 |
Kevyn Shortell wrote: |
| 2 |
> Well I for one would be completely SOL without it, my isp is sane and |
| 3 |
> doesn't use PPPoE thank god. They do however use DHCP. And in case your |
| 4 |
> wondering who my ISP is, it's Comcast Cable, which probably has more |
| 5 |
> users than SOHO DSL. It isn't as if they are a little ISP. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
In Canada, DSL accounts for atleast half, perhaps even greater number of |
| 8 |
all broadband subscribers. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> Also, every wireless gateway on the planet uses DHCP, same goes for |
| 11 |
> basic firewall boxes. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I don't see the need to tell all those users that they have to do |
| 14 |
> additional things in order to get thier box on the net during the |
| 15 |
> install process. Do you? It doesn't hurt anything to leave it. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
During the install process I would expect to have dhcpcd and pppoe |
| 18 |
support included. We weren't talking about the install process, we were |
| 19 |
talking about the base system. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
As for what it 'hurts', nothing, per se. The only effects I was |
| 22 |
referring to is runaway packages in the base system profile which can |
| 23 |
cause problems down the road. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
For example, it's better to have as minimal a base system as possible to |
| 26 |
minimize support and allow flexibility. Perl 5 in the base system is a |
| 27 |
potential issue. It's rather large, and there are a significant number |
| 28 |
of users who have no use for it. Its inclusion should likely be |
| 29 |
investigated moreso than that of dhcpcd. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
FWIW, I don't feel terribly strongly one way or another with regards to |
| 32 |
dhcpcd. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Stewart Honsberger |
| 36 |
http://blackdeath.snerk.org/ |
| 37 |
"Capitalists, by nature, organize to protect themselves. |
| 38 |
-- Geeks, by nature, resist organizaion." |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives