[arch-projects] [initscripts][PATCH] arch-sysctl: suppress errors about unknown keys

[lolilolicon]

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Tom Gundersen <teg at jklm.no> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 5:55 PM, lolilolicon <lolilolicon at gmail.com> wrote:
>> The errors about unknown keys in boot messages are harmless, but annoying.
>> Some keys may become unknown when some modules are disabled, yet the user
>> may want to keep the sysctl.conf entries so they can take effect when the
>> modules are subsequently (re)enabled.  One example is the IPv6 module and
>> the net.ipv6.conf.all.use_tempaddr key.
>
> Thanks for the patch. However, I don't think this is what we want. As
> a general rule we don't hide any error/warning messages from the user.
> It might be that the user does not care, but it might also be that
> s/he misspelled the name of the key, or that there is some other error
> where action needs to be taken.

According to sysctl(8), the -e option is used to "ignore errors about
unknown keys", so no "other error" would be hidden by it.

It's a good thing if we can report error on misspelled keys, but only if
we don't report the same errors when the keys are just unknown due to
disabled modules.  Currently I have IPv6 disabled, so I get in boot
messages:

    error: "net.ipv6.conf.all.use_tempaddr" is an unknown key
    error: "net.ipv6.conf.default.use_tempaddr" is an unknown key

Now if I consistently get these errors, it would be very likely for me to
ignore some other real errors, like misspelling:

    error: "net.ipv9.conf.default.use_tempaddr" is an unknown key

BTW, pre arch-sysctl, it used to be `sysctl -q -p &>/dev/null`, which
really hides *all* errors; in contrast, The -e option sounds far more
reasonable...

>
> Alternatively, you could keep all your ipv6 (or whatever) settings in
> a separate file in /etc/sysctl.d/ipv6.conf, and rename it to
> ipv6.conf.backup when you don't want them to be used...

No, I'm afraid I would then misspell the filename when I rename it back ;)
Seriously, I don't think anyone would choose to do so; it's unnecessary
hassle.

>
>> Signed-off-by: lolilolicon <lolilolicon at gmail.com>
>
> Signed-off-by without your real name doesn't really mean anything btw...

This is the name I go by in the Arch community, a pretty honest fake name
that you can trust.  If you prefer, I will get rid of the Signed-off-by :)

>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom