Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 2/7] batctl: Add command to create/destroy batman-adv interface
Hi All, I too like create/destroy. John On Tue, 20 Sep 2016, Sven Eckelmann wrote: On Dienstag, 20. September 2016 16:24:18 CEST Linus L?ssing wrote: On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 05:30:17PM +0200, Sven Eckelmann wrote: The command "new" can be used to create a batman-adv interface without any interface attached. This is helpful when the interfaces should be configured independently of the first attached interface. Like in the title of this mail, maybe naming the commands "create" and "destroy" instead of "new"/"destroy"? The former sounds slightly more antonymic to me. Has anyone else an opinion about that? I personally would be fine with "create" instead of "new". Kind regards, Sven
Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 2/7] batctl: Add command to create/destroy batman-adv interface
On Dienstag, 20. September 2016 16:24:18 CEST Linus Lüssing wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 05:30:17PM +0200, Sven Eckelmann wrote: > > The command "new" can be used to create a batman-adv interface without any > > interface attached. This is helpful when the interfaces should be > > configured independently of the first attached interface. > > Like in the title of this mail, maybe naming the commands > "create" and "destroy" instead of "new"/"destroy"? > > The former sounds slightly more antonymic to me. Has anyone else an opinion about that? I personally would be fine with "create" instead of "new". Kind regards, Sven signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 2/7] batctl: Add command to create/destroy batman-adv interface
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 05:30:17PM +0200, Sven Eckelmann wrote: > The command "new" can be used to create a batman-adv interface without any > interface attached. This is helpful when the interfaces should be > configured independently of the first attached interface. Like in the title of this mail, maybe naming the commands "create" and "destroy" instead of "new"/"destroy"? The former sounds slightly more antonymic to me.
