[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ifconfig



john gennard <joney@clara.co.uk> [2002-09-15 20:30:54 +0100]:
> Have been trying to use 'ifconfig' to configure a number of NICs as 
> an alternative to 'etherconf'. 
> 
> Etherconf puts the configurations into /etc/network/interfaces, but 
> I don't see where ifconfig puts them. Running 'ifconfig -a' shows the
> eth0 and eth1 details if run shortly afterwards, but if run after 
> rebooting it shows the details minus the inet address and the card 
> is not usable.

The ifconfig program is a very low level command like 'mv' or 'rm'.
It does not have configuration files.

The etherconf script is a higher level interface that attempts to set
up and configure those configuration files you mentioned for the ifup
command.

For years the ifconfig script was used directly at system startup time
in the /etc/*rc* scripts.  The system admin would just hard code in
the script the commands needed to boot that particular system.
Obviously every machine was hand crafted with tender loving care.

As machines became more mass produced those scripts were generalized.
Hand crafting startup scripts is now out of favor.  But how to do
that?  Every system does it differently.  On most systems you are in a
maze of twisty little passages all different.  Whereas on debian you
are in a twisty little maze of passages all different.  Debian is no
different in that it is different from everyone else.

I am not an expert here because since I started using Debian this part
has always just worked for me and I have not needed to dig into the
details.  But I believe debian uses 'ifup' called from the
/etc/init.d/networking script to configure the networking.  I believe
ifup is a program designed to replace ifconfig and reads those
configuration files you mentioned.

So to better answer your question, the alternative to etherconf is not
ifconfig but rather your favorite editor on those files.

HTH
Bob

Attachment: pgpwZUAIV7TX_.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: