Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 03/10/08 22:12 CST:

> I will continue to use it and promote its use. Sorry.

I know that sounds crappy. Sorry for that. It simply came out
bad and I really didn't proofread.


> Now that said, I do need to accommodate LFS and its use of IP-Route.
> I thought I put an incidental mention that you could eliminate the
> patch if you have Net-Tools installed. I install Net-Tools in LFS
> still to this day and really see no need to change. I didn't think
> the mention was overkill. If someone wants ifconfig, they won't mind
> installing the Net-Tools package.
> 
> Tell me how we can phrase it so that folks will know that you can
> still use ifconfig. I'm wide open to suggestions. I don't want to
> eliminate the mention of ifconfig altogether though.

Net-Tools is not dead. I've been using these tools for 20-something
years, so it's hard to learn new stuff when the existing may still
be the status-quo. See http://net-tools.berlios.de/

Though development stopped for a while, the effectiveness of the
tool did not. Other folks also recognize this.

I believe we need to encourage development of the existing tools,
instead of developing new ones. Apparently I'm not the only one.

Discussion is welcome.

-- 
Randy

rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.22] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686]
22:22:00 up 22 days, 13:10, 1 user, load average: 2.41, 1.66, 1.09
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to