From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB7871FF17C for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2025 17:15:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D1DE316EE0; Wed, 23 Jul 2025 17:16:55 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <0ea3edeb-a110-455e-812e-7b9f019d6c77@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 17:16:54 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Thomas Lamprecht , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20250723142106.235104-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> <175328294843.3720382.10504362558256531970.b4-ty@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Hanreich In-Reply-To: <175328294843.3720382.10504362558256531970.b4-ty@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.703 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 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] applied: [PATCH pve-common 1/1] inotify/interfaces: use 'ip link' instead of /proc/net/dev 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On 7/23/25 17:06, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: [snip] > I do not recall for sure anymore, but do differing bridge-ports work > transparently with the ifupdown2 changes from Christoph. With that it might be > nice to support it here too in the midterm, but that is certainly not a blocker > for now. I'm not sure if I understand 100% - do you mean if the name used in bridge-ports differs from the name of the referenced interface in /e/n/i? That doesn't work currently, since the validation breaks. I've discussed this initially with Dominik today, and we'd need to resolve altnames every time we look up names from bridge-ports, etc. If we want to support mixing names in the configuration, then we'd additionally have to construct a temporary, merged, configuration and validate against that. > Applied with perltidy formatting changes squashed in, thanks! I will pay more attention to running `make tidy` in the future, still not used to the fact that we actually have a formatter now - sorry. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel