On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 06:34:18PM +0300, Andrew O. Shadoura wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 13:30:53 +0100
> Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Why is that necessary? So far as I can see, the purpose of the state
> > files is:
> > - Let ifup refuse to reapply a configuration (even if it failed to
> > apply it in the first place)
> > - Allow ifdown to take shortcuts, which often don't work
>
> Don't know what do you mean when you say 'shortcuts' and how they don't
> work. You can use multiple configurations in your config file, and do
>
> $ ifup eth1=home
>
> Then state file will have a record eth1=home, so ifdown eth1 will know
> which configuration to use to take the interface down.
ifdown should not *need* to know how the interface was brought up.
And given that many people apparently like ifup because they can
change the active configuration without it interfering, it would be
a good thing if ifdown could cope with that too. (It can do, within
some limits. But in general, it cannot.)
> > They don't even provide the useful feature of copying the
> > configuration that was applied, in case it is subsequently changed or
> > removed in /etc/network/interfaces.
>
> They don't have to.
So I just imagined that ifdown completely fails if this is done?
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
- Albert Camus
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110405155902.gw2...@decadent.org.uk
