i just had a look and a i like the idea of putting this on CD (We are
selling our systems with an IDE Flashdisk, though). But,
i would like to see the config scripts be seperate from the configs itself,
thats one difference to the release i made for myself.

CS> What exactly do you mean here?

 The other is of course Kernel 2.4...

CS> I plan on re-working pretty much everything and making a 2.4 kernel
based firewall, with uClibc (for small floppies & limited functionality
systems) and optional support for current glibc libraries for folks with the
space and need to run it.

But i like the new lrcfg interface it looks nice. But please change the
description there:
b <pgkg>) Backup
d <pgkg>) Set Backup Destination
and so on,

i tried multiple time to insert:
d root
...
<pkgnum> or something like that would be nicer...

CS> I'll change this in the next release.  As a seperate issue, would it be
better to use the package names, or stick with the numbers, or maybe even
support both (should be possible, as long as no-one makes a 3.lrp package
:)?  Also, you can use E and L (upper or lower case) for package "numbers"
with the b, d, and t commands, as well (this may also not be obvious).

CS> Actually, I couldn't wait...Being a firm believer in the concept that
things should work as expected, I modified the script to accept either a
package name or number, with the following package names as special cases:
e E all everything - Backup all packages
l L - Backup everything but logs

Now, whatever you think <pkg> is, the scripts will probably do what you
want...this functionality will be in the next release.

Charles Steinkuehler
http://lrp.steinkuehler.net
http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror)



_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel

Reply via email to