Am Mittwoch, 15. Juni 2011, 00:21:12 schrieb Erich Titl: > Hi Folks > > testing some of the webconf enabled tools I found that some paths have > changed, particularly traceroute, which used to be a package on it's > own, now it appears to be a busybox applet. It used to be at /usr/sbin, > now it is at /usr/bin. Of course this is a challenge for the webconf > package.
Erich; I'm afraid you've worked with an outdated source. The path has been fixed in lwp-1.tar.gz in January. > I am not sure if a construct of the form > > TRACEROUTE=`which traceroute` > $TRACEROUTE $address > > is the best solution for this kind of a problem. > > Changes like this may happen any time in any package and are difficult > to detect without proper regression testing. I always was (and I still > am) in favour of including the relevant webconf files in the > corresponding .lrp packages. This leverages the risk of such glitches, > as the developer, even if he could not care less about the GUI, will kow > best about the changes he made to the underlying software. I would like > you to reconsider the decision taken on this issue a few months ago. > > I intend to provide this to openswan in the form of generating an > additional package which can be loaded at the user's discretion, > something like > > either > > ipsec.lrp, which is the standard package we are used to. > ipsec-wc.lrp, which is the standard package with included web gui. > > webconf-1.2 shows how this can be crufted together without pain. > > I am of the opinion, the .lwp files should be gotten rid of (Scipio > would have loved this construct :-) ) My opinion hasn't changed since then :) Esp. seperation of the GUI stuff from the base package and the autoloading feature ow lwp's is a plus IMHO. I believe the webGUI can always be a source of security issues, so it's an advantage to just delete all lwp files and webconf.lrp to get rid of it. If I follow your proposal, we will have an initrd-wc.lrp (in fact four for every flavour we support i486, geode, etc) including the GUI stuff related to busybox (traceroute, ping etc), which needs to be replaced. And so on and on - I guess this becomes confusing in a short time. Where to put pages that shows entries from more than one package, like the one who presents the logfiles? And where does a user or developer has to look to the files that needed to be patched, if shorewall logfiles changes? As you probably know, I do not use the webgui, and I'd like to have it as an extra layer on top, so it won't interfer with the development of the base packages and keep the documentation work as small as possible. It's to explain the user which ipsec package he needs if wants a GUI for ipsec in webconf, but it's huge task to explain users what they need to do for all packages and that they have to reinstall from scratch if they don't like a GUI (and all the useless and probably dangerous stuff lying around). And what should be the default to install - the ones with or without the GUI stuff? kp ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
