On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi_at_gmail.com> wrote: > Just updated to HEAD and I saw the recent ifconfig, usb ethernet, > et all changes: > > $ ifconfig > usbus0: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 0 > usbus1: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 0 > usbus2: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 0 > usbus3: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 0 > msk0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 > options=c011b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO,LINKSTATE> > ether 00:1d:60:b6:eb:97 > inet 192.168.20.3 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.20.255 > media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT > <full-duplex,flowcontrol,rxpause,txpause>) > status: active > usbus4: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 0 > usbus5: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 0 > usbus6: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 0 > usbus7: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 0 > lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 16384 > options=3<RXCSUM,TXCSUM> > inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000 > $ ifconfig -l > usbus0 usbus1 usbus2 usbus3 msk0 usbus4 usbus5 usbus6 usbus7 lo0 > > I don't have any USB ethernet devices, so I would expect usbus, et > all to be blank, but this would break a few (dumb) scenarios we have > at my work where it goes and looks at ifconfig -l (of course I've > tried convincing others to use ifconfig -l inet instead, but that was > to no avail). > This could potentially break other dumb scripts as well. > So the question is: what are we gaining with this additional, terse output? > Thanks, > -Garrett I believe a patch has been proposed that would eliminate the usbus devices from ifconfig output: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-November/021542.html -BrandonReceived on Tue Nov 30 2010 - 16:30:12 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:09 UTC