Re: additional ifupdown problems

Hi Dave, On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 4:51 PM, David Henderson wrote: > On 9/21/16, Martin Townsend wrote: >> Hi Dave, >> >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 3:41 PM, David Henderson >> wrote: >>> Hey Martin, >>> >>> On

Re: additional ifupdown problems

On 9/21/16, Martin Townsend wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 3:41 PM, David Henderson > wrote: >> Hey Martin, >> >> On 9/21/16, Martin Townsend wrote: >>> Hi Dave, >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 2:06

Re: additional ifupdown problems

Hey Martin, On 9/21/16, Martin Townsend wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 2:06 PM, David Henderson > wrote: >> Good morning everyone! I'll add each question with the answer below: >> >> Q: maybe because something in if-pre-up.d

Re: additional ifupdown problems

Hi Dave, On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 2:06 PM, David Henderson wrote: > Good morning everyone! I'll add each question with the answer below: > > Q: maybe because something in if-pre-up.d fails? > A: there is only that one test script in if-up.d, no others so nothing >

Re: additional ifupdown problems

Good morning everyone! I'll add each question with the answer below: Q: maybe because something in if-pre-up.d fails? A: there is only that one test script in if-up.d, no others so nothing there to fail. And judging by the output from 'ifup', it doesn't even appear that the parsing of the

Re: ifupdown problem

On 9/20/16, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:33 PM, David Henderson > wrote: >>> General idea is described here: >>> https://busybox.net/~vda/no_ifup.txt >> >> Looked at it, wouldn't this be the same thing as scripts in >>