On Fri, Oct 12, 2001 at 03:30:28PM -0500, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > 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?
AB> Well i mean that in LRP 2.9.8 you have only the settings in the network.conf (e.g. IF0_IFNAME=...) and not functions defined like in Dachstein. I find this confusing. i have only "real config files" as network.conf and network_direct.conf and all the shell script stuff in /etc/init.d/network. But thats caused by the base (LRP 2.9.8) too... Is it now clearer ?? > > 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. AB> Sounds nice. i am dreaming of that since half a year, but i could not get the needed binary to compile with uClibc (i needed isdnutils and especially the ipsec stuff and iptables. Did not get this to work). And i do not want to use any Firewall systems with kernel 2.2, 2.4 is so much easier and cooler for the way i design my rules... > > 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). > AB> i think package names are to long (so much characters to type in ;-) > 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. yep, sound good. Are you planning to upgrade to a new busybox version ?? It works o.k. for me (including bb ifconfig and bb route and even ash). If you would use even init and syslogd from bb root.lrp gets quite small, and i think the functionality is o.k for a router , or am i wrong ?? > > Charles Steinkuehler > http://lrp.steinkuehler.net > http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror) > --arne -------------------------------------------------------------------�--- Arne Bernin Netropol Digitale Systeme Lagerstrasse 30a Tel: +49 4043250000 D-20357 Hamburg/Germany Fax: +49 4028416740 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Fppmpppff mpmmmmfmm mfpmffmpppff pmfmppfmmmppppp pmpmmmpppppp mfffmmfmp fmmmmfmfppmfmmmfmf! _______________________________________________ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
