27.0.1 did not fix it, and I reproduced it on 2 more Macs, one was literally factory reset, just installed a fresh macOS 27, installed Homebrew, installed Bash5, ran ifconfig .... bug reproduced
Who says it's deprecated? If it's the same people who think my Ethernet port should be called "enp0s31f6" instead of "eth0", then I'm afraid I do not respect their authority...
The people who maintained it, the kernel developers, the Debian distribution team? You don't accept their authority? I mean, I know this is a MacOS thread, but that's wild.
Fascinatingly enough, this is Conway's law in action. The Linux kernel doesn't break user space, and ifconfig is on the user space side of that boundary. On BSD, they're organized differently, and went a different way.
I filed a bashbug: https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?68722
Who needs a physical MAC address when you can just have a spiritual connection to the iCloud?
27.0.1 did not fix it, and I reproduced it on 2 more Macs, one was literally factory reset, just installed a fresh macOS 27, installed Homebrew, installed Bash5, ran ifconfig .... bug reproduced
Interestingly, running `ifconfig` from a Zsh shell still does show MAC addresses
I can't reproduce this.
It seems to only affect Bash 5.3.20 (Homebrew) - very odd:
Interestingly I can also reproduce it with Bash 5.3.15 from nix-darwin.
I wonder if this is about notarization or something.
Update: I think it's about code signature and how the API responds - which also corresponds to root and system binaries not seeing the issue.
it works fine in system bash for me
Yes it works in my system bash too (see above) - seems to be some sort of obscure Bash bug...
ifconfig is deprecated in modern Linux. Is it not deprecated in BSD? Does Apple not provide the ip(8) command-line tools?
https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/stonking/man8/ip.8.html
No, it seems that iproute2 is Linux-first, or Linux-only: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iproute2
Sad!
Who says it's deprecated? If it's the same people who think my Ethernet port should be called "enp0s31f6" instead of "eth0", then I'm afraid I do not respect their authority...
The people who maintained it, the kernel developers, the Debian distribution team? You don't accept their authority? I mean, I know this is a MacOS thread, but that's wild.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/03/msg00780.html
16+ years ago
The maintainers barely touched it since 2001.
Fascinatingly enough, this is Conway's law in action. The Linux kernel doesn't break user space, and ifconfig is on the user space side of that boundary. On BSD, they're organized differently, and went a different way.