Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:58:43 +0100
From: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
To: "Ariadne Conill" <ariadne@dereferenced.org>
Cc: ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: Proposed change: drop busybox iproute2, always use real
 iproute2
Message-ID: <20200320095843.0d7d5fad@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
In-Reply-To: <e6bc9817f0e78e797cd83f5e189791f2@dereferenced.org>
References: <e6bc9817f0e78e797cd83f5e189791f2@dereferenced.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:29:55 +0000
"Ariadne Conill" <ariadne@dereferenced.org> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I would like to propose that we drop busybox iproute2, in favor of
> always using real iproute2.
> 
> The primary reasons are:
> 
> - Real iproute2 has significantly advanced by comparison to the
>   busybox implementation.  While the busybox implementation is
>   passable for basic tasks, it is lacking for more advanced
>   tasks.

I think most users does not need more than basic tasks like setting ip
address.

> - Because of this, many tutorials concerning iproute2 provide
>   advice that is not particularly useful to our default iproute2
>   implementation.
> - Because of that, many people recommend installing real iproute2
>   anyway.
> 
> Providing real iproute2 and removing the busybox implementation
> results in approximately 1.4MiB increase in the base image.
> 
> However, I think we get a *lot* for that 1.4MiB -- iproute2 can

The downside is that all the users that don't need those 1.4M will get
that cost.

> potentially replace ifenslave and other utilities as well, but
> we will need to adjust some of our ifupdown addon scripts to
> handle this.  In general, I think it is a good move for us in
> general, especially with the work being done to enable service
> isolation in VRFs and network namespaces that is underway.  By
> switching the default implementation, users will be able to make
> use of these features out of the box.
> 
> I would like to implement this next week before freeze if nobody
> objects.

I vote for keeping busybox iproute2 and document that apk add iproute2
is needed for advanced use.

Thanks though, for offering do the work.

> 
> Thanks,
> Ariadne