From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B43E1FF179 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 13:00:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 99BBE106B; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 13:00:58 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 13:00:25 +0100 Message-Id: From: "Christoph Heiss" To: "Thomas Lamprecht" X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0 References: <20251111140014.1443471-1-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <133c690c-db26-4342-aa81-196dc7f5462d@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <133c690c-db26-4342-aa81-196dc7f5462d@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1762948800383 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.048 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH installer v3 00/15] support network interface name pinning X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On Tue Nov 11, 2025 at 4:04 PM CET, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 11.11.25 um 15:00 schrieb Christoph Heiss: >> [..] >> Tested all combinations, i.e. for each of GUI, TUI and auto-installer, >> installed with pinning disabled (checking for regressions) and with >> pinning enabled at some custom interface names set. > What I noticed on smoke-testing the GTK UI: UX wise it would be nice to > detect duplicate names early, i.e., on closing the "option" window used > to configure pinned names manually. > > But if it's just that, it's probably best done as follow-up. Just quickly tested this again to be sure, but that is already working? I.e. if I enter `nic` for two different interfaces and click either the "OK" button or the close button of the dialog, both trigger the validation and show an error message. Or am I missing something? _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel