Hi Erich; Am Montag, 26. Januar 2015, 00:26:51 schrieb Erich Titl: > Hi KP > > Am 25.01.2015 um 15:36 schrieb kp kirchdoerfer: > ... > > > it works! > > Good job detecting my vlans!! > > That is standard in the LEAF implementation, I only needed to adapt the > representation scheme. I don't know if you are still using the ethx.y > scheme but this definitely will not work in the interface for adding > vlans (I found it too difficult to include it in JS)
Yes I use the ethx.y scheme; at least they are shown and don't lead to a cluttered page. > I just saw that the link to build VLANs from the web page is missing, > boooh, another lost straw. You will add it? :) > > A problem has been introduced - when building the lwp package it rewuires > > root permission - caused by > > > > cd $* ; tar --owner=0 --group=0 --mode=755 -czf $(CURDIR)/$@ * > > Right, we should run tar under sudo. I'm afraid this will not help, it requires also a password.... > > in buildtool.mk. > > We should avoid root permissions when building packages. > > Yes, that's what sudo is for. I personally prefer to build the .lwp > files in the makefile. Look at the simple construct you cited above. In > my opinion this is safer and more comprehensive than having a separate > script, as one doesn't have to repeatedly define files and paths in > different locations. But as always, opinions may differ. > > If you want to continue doing this in buildlwp.sh, be my guest. I did > not really want to touch that, in my eyes it is redundant. I would > rather prefer to move all .lwp builds into lwp's buildtool.mk. They are > not packages like the other ones anyway, unfortunately. I have no preferences - it could be done with the current sh scripts (based on a your work years ago) , it could be done in buildtool.cfg - where it really should reside to keep the logic of packaging, but we should avoid requiring a password. > > Most important reason - if something goes wrong, one can harm the build > > host. Second important reason, it's not possible to create images > > automatically with buildtool.sh > > Do you refer to buildtool.pl? I know that. For some reason in the past > it was decided to use a perl construct to control the build. It could > have been done though. I was unclear - I refer to tools/buildall.sh. This is the one to build all and to build the images later. It tooks more than two hrs on my build machine - for each architecture (i386/x86_64...) so it has to run unattended. > > Your new pages looks a lot nicer than the untouched ones. Maybe you have > > some time to review the other pages as well and to improve their visual > > appearance (namely dropbear, DNS/DHCP Setting (dnsmasq.cgi), keyboard > > maps and ipv6 connections)? > > If it is just an optical remake I can have a look, but possibly they > should be extended with tooltips, interactivity e.t.c and the structure > probably needs an overhaul, as unfortunately they stem from different > aproaches to web interfaces. It would really be nice to have a web > developer to give them a touch up, maybe even think about the redesign > of the web interface. Yeah would be great. But all I'm asking now is to review the "optical remake" if possible. And what I'm missing, that I do not see the tooltips etc working? > Again the structure of LINUX makes this quite a > job. I just looked once at the interface of m0n0wall and was impressed > by the neat presentation. Better than most commercial products. > > I am trying to build a multi radio WLAN repeater for the yachting > community, and they don't want to bother with command line interfaces, > so I was forced to dig into this myself. > > - dropbear never used it, I am old fashioned and use sshd... so I don't > really know what is required. > > - DNS/DHCP never used dnsmasq I am using dnscache and dhcpd, so again > need to understand that first. > > - keyboard maps, IMHO not applicable, this is the WEB interface and > changing the keyboard layout here does not make any difference to the > user. This I would consider rather puzzling. Pls have look into the cgi scripts - if it's only adapting a common CSS it would be fine for me for the time being. If you find it's to hard to improve, let' stay as-is. > - IPv6, can you give me an intro? It is so vast and documentation sucks. > (should it integrate IPSEC, prioritizing e.t.c.) Shoud address > assignment not be integrated in the interface page alongside IPv4? We > probably should include address plausibility tests in JS, as it may be > too complex to do it in shell scripts. It's just the IPv6 Active connections page - my intro wouldn't be enough yet to add a page for adding and editing IPv6 adresses. On my curent agenda are to include your changes without any regrerssion for 5.1.3 and to get a 5.2 beta done in a foreseeable future... kp ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
