From: Stuart Henderson Subject: Re: LLDP daemon and display tool To: tech@openbsd.org Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 11:36:50 +0100 On 2025/04/25 12:04, Henning Brauer wrote: > * Stuart Henderson [2025-04-25 03:25]: > > On 2025/04/24 10:38, Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM) wrote: > > > This is great! Some quick testing shows it correctly sees > > > all the Fortinet and Juniper hardware on my networks. > > > > > > But I would suggest just calling it lldp[d] right from the > > > start. I don't see a conflict as it's makes no sense to > > > run both this and ports at the same time. And if they > > > are both installed, the ports cli names don't collisde > > > with this one's. > > > > The rc.d scripts conflict. > > then the ports one needs to be adjusted. > > our ntpd is ntpd, not ontpd. yes and we had a problem with that around 5.0-5.1 > our ldapd is ldapd, not oldapd. no conflict > our smtpd is smtpd, not osmtpd. no conflict > our bgpd is bgpd, not obgpd. the possibly-conflicting rc script was named quagga_bgpd from the start > and so on and so on. the rc-script could be renamed, but: 1. what to? 2. unless it's renamed in the release _before_ this is added, upgrades will be broken. user updates base from a version with ports lldpd installed to a version with lldpd from base, so overwriting rc.d/lldpd. updating packages at that point will _remove_ the rc.d/lldpd script. if we want to reuse existing names of things from ports in base we could really do with a separate namespace for ports and base rc.d scripts.