On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:21:33AM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote > Blaming the devs for your broken modem/router is rather unfair. If > you'd known it was unable to handle IPv6 correctly, why didn't you > set the flag accordingly?
My ISP didn't support ipv6 at that time. They're now running a beta for native ipv6 (no tunneling) but I don't have the time to play with bleeding edge stuff. Regardless of the fact that my router/modem does or does not support ipv6, if I don't have ipv6 service from my ISP (or a tunnel broker) ipv6 is pointless. > If you didn't know, HTH were the devs supposed to know? The devs *CHANGED AN EXISTING DEFAULT FLAG* from -ipv6 to ipv6. What percentage of the user base was running ipv6 a couple of years ago? Why couldn't they have left the default at -ipv6? Ever heard of "the principle of least surprise" aka "the principle of least astonishment"? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment Unnecessarily changing defaults violates that principle in the worst way. There's an old saying... * good judgement is the result of experience * experience is the result of bad judgement As a result of my "experience" with the ipv6 flag, I no longer robo-update. Note that in the first post of this thread, I said... > I normally... > > emerge -pv --deep --update world | less > > ...before updating, to check for booby-traps. So you see, I did learn from my "experience". I do check for stuff like this now. As an additional safety measure, I also begin the USE variable with "-*". -- Walter Dnes <waltd...@waltdnes.org>
