From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPS id 91113730D4
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:59:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with UTF8SMTP id 814451BB05
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:58:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with UTF8SMTPS id 1941C1BAFA
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:58:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with UTF8SMTP id DB56746483
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:58:54 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <3a4f3dea-4fa6-e919-568b-33f047956b39@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:58:54 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:90.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/90.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <20210616182317.12758-1-deac+git@denkn.at>
 <20210616182317.12758-2-deac+git@denkn.at>
 <92168992-a4f5-76ee-c4f1-66a7e837a303@proxmox.com>
 <1623933097.d1qp4xibda.astroid@nora.none>
From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1623933097.d1qp4xibda.astroid@nora.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.984 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A            -0.17 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 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 v2 container 2/2] close #3471: Support for
 NetworkManager on CentOS.
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 12:59:25 -0000

On 6/17/21 14:33, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> On June 17, 2021 2:28 pm, Dominik Csapak wrote:
>>>    	my $bootproto = '';
>>>    
>>> @@ -213,7 +214,7 @@ sub setup_network {
>>>    	    if ($d->{ip6} eq 'auto') {
>>>    		$data .= "IPV6_AUTOCONF=yes\n";
>>>    	    }
>>> -	    if ($d->{ip6} eq 'dhcp') {
>>> +	    elsif ($d->{ip6} eq 'dhcp') {
>>
>> this change does nothing?
> 
> it changes the condition for the else branch below (previously, ip6 ==
> auto would take it, now it does not - see the bug report).

ah yes thanks^^
stared at it for a few minutes and did not see it...

> 
>>
>>>    		$data .= "DHCPV6C=yes\n";
>>>    	    } else {
>>>    		$data .= "IPV6ADDR=$d->{ip6}\n";
>>> @@ -229,6 +230,15 @@ sub setup_network {
>>>    	    }
>>>    	}