Re: Dropping support for libnl1 and libnl2?

[Robby Workman <robby rlworkman net>]

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:29:26 -0600
Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 13:57 -0600, Robby Workman wrote:
> > On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 12:11:49 -0600
> > Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com> wrote:
> > 
> > > All the major distros appear to have been shipping libnl3.x for
> > > quite a while already, and it's becoming increasingly difficult
> > > to support libnl1.x and 2.x with some of the newer features that
> > > are being added to NM like bridging, bonding, vlan, etc.
> > > 
> > > So, given that libnl 3.2.7 has been out for almost a year
> > > (2012-01-20), and most major distros are packaging it (Ubuntu,
> > > OpenSUSE, Debian, Fedora, Gentoo, Arch), would anyone object to
> > > libnl
> > > >= 3.2.7 as a build requirement for the next release of
> > > >NetworkManager?
> > 
> > 
> > We've got 3.2.11 in the last stable Slackware, so sure, that's fine
> > with us, even if we're not "major" enough to warrant concern ;-)
> 
> Aww, not true.  Thanks for the update; by "major" I really mean those
> that don't have derivatives.  eg Mint would be a derivative distro,
> but Slackware would be a major one.


I think you meant s,don't have,aren't, but yeah.  Even so, no offense
was taken - my response was completely good-natured.  :-)

-RW