[arch-dev-public] [signoff] rp-pppoe 3.10-1
aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Thu Jul 24 11:31:23 EDT 2008
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Daniel Isenmann <daniel.isenmann at gmx.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:27:51 +0200
> Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org> wrote:
>> Aaron Griffin schrieb:
>> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Daniel Isenmann
>> > <daniel.isenmann at gmx.de> 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 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
>> 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
More information about the arch-dev-public