On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 10:31 -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:27:51 +0200 Thomas Bächler wrote:

...

Aaron Griffin schrieb:

...

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...

Hi,

above package is in testing for both archs. Please signoff. I can't test the package because I don't use it, I have a router and not connected directly on the line.

If no one uses this, you can take my awesome "blame me if crap be broken" signoff

I wonder why this is in core anyway. PPPoE connections can be established with the pppd package alone. The only advantages this package has are:

1) A fancy configuration script. With pppd only, you'd have to read http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PPPoE_Setup_with_pppd and set it up. We could include some example configuration like this in the

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Daniel Isenmann wrote: pppd

...

...

package though.

2) A PPPoE server. We don't need that in core.

With pppd, the PPPoE protocol is handled in the kernel (while rp-pppoe does it in userspace), so pppd probably has less overhead anyway.

I vote for db-move rp-pppoe core extra.

I can't give any comments on that. I really don't use it and have never used it.

I trust your statement. Any complains about moving to extra? If no, you can move it.

Maybe we should ask the users who actually use it - see if there is any rational reason they *depend* on it as opposed to pppd

Hi, Please keep this package in core. It's very easy to use and helps a lot when you need connection from cd. Direct pppd usage is harder if you have no internet access to get documentation. Keeping rp-pppoe in core cd is very convenient so please consider keeping it. Thank you in advance, Hussam.