[Dnsmasq-discuss] Enable HAVE_IPSET by default

Vladislav Grishenko themiron at mail.ru
Thu Mar 21 11:44:04 GMT 2013


Hi Simon,
Just my 2 cents, binary size is important on devices with very limited flash
size (2Mb, 4Mb).
So HAVE_IPSET compile-time switch should continue to exist, same as others,
have no idea about default compile-time states, we always can override them.

Best Regards, Vladislav Grishenko


> -----Original Message-----
> From: dnsmasq-discuss-bounces at lists.thekelleys.org.uk [mailto:dnsmasq-
> discuss-bounces at lists.thekelleys.org.uk] On Behalf Of Simon Kelley
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 4:08 PM
> To: dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Enable HAVE_IPSET by default
> 
> On 20/03/13 17:31, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > Hi Simon,
> >
> > It's just occurred to me that no router developer is going to know to
> > turn HAVE_IPSET on, and hence, it won't be available immediately on
> > any devices, which is a bummer. Further, unless the --ipset= options
> > are used, HAVE_IPSET doesn't contribute at _all_ to the runtime of the
> app.
> > And even further, if HAVE_LINUX_NETWORK isn't enabled, HAVE_IPSET is
> > automatically disabled.
> >
> > Makes sense, then, I think, to uncomment HAVE_IPSET by default.
> >
> > How about it?
> >
> 
> I'm torn.
> 
> The main reason for not including this is to reduce footprint. (It does
affect
> binary size, which matters, but the delta isn't going to be very
> big.)
> 
> The second reason (in general) for excluding stuff at compile time is to
> maintain the invariant that the distributed tarball can be built with just
a C-
> compiler and make: no other library or tool dependencies. This was
relevant
> for the first versions of ipset, but is no longer a factor as it doesn't
depend on
> external libraries.
> 
> OTOH.....
> 
> Router firmware makers, in my experience, make definite decisions about
> what they want included at compile time: the defaults as I distribute them
> are not very relevant, as they get overridden. Ideally, you want router
distros
> to actively take up the new facility and support it in their configuration
> system/ web pages/ documentation.
> 
> "Full fat" distro packagers also pick what they want, taking into account
that
> library dependencies are not a problem. I include ipset in the Debian
> dnsmasq package, that will cascade to Ubuntu. I'd expect Fedora and thus
> Redhat to take the same path.
> 
> 
> Finally, if it's going to be on by default, and given the limited size
delta/lack of
> library definitions, there's an argument for not making it compile-time
> selectable at all. Every compile-time switch contributes to the
combinatorial
> explosion of possible binaries, and lots of bugs come from unanticipated
> interactions in untested compile-flag combinations.
> 
> 
> Opinions, anyone?
> 
> 
> 
> Simon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
> Dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss




More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list