> As the topic says, please describe what prevents iproute from being used as > the default so we can fix that.
The only problem I know if with iproute is that it is Priority: optional. > Unless someone is going to utilize this bug for "tracking" something, it's > useless. That was my intent in filing it. As you describe the move from net-tools to iproute will require some transition. I was hoping this bug could be used to keep track of other things in debian that need to change. I think the transition could also be tracked on a wiki page, but I do like the idea of having a bug in the BTS that people will see when they look there. The BTS is the first place I look. > Unless some useful information is provided to this bugreport soon<tm> (as > it's already been open for almost a year without providing any useful > information), I will close it because the problem you described is not a > problem in *iproute* as far as I can tell. Having bugs open in the BTS for a long time is not a personal reflection on the maintainer of the package or the quality of the package. Nor was it my intent to demand that you personally drive any sort of transition. The BTS is a tool used to make debian better. Now maybe it suffers from "if you have a hammer everything looks like a nail" problem... Do you agree that debian should move to iproute as the default way of configuring networking? If so, how would you like to track that transition? Thanks, -- Matt Taggart [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
