Re: [LONG] ppp-udeb: A succesful installation using it, some ideas and some requests for advices
eddy.petrisor@gmail.com wrote:
>> Yes. I already explained this multiple times. An IP address is not
>> *needed* on the ethernet interface, but always configuring one is
>> simpler and may prevent problems later.
>
>If I am going to do that on the connection from my provider, I will
>have my contract termitated in a second because I am not allowed to
>use other IPs in their network than the ones given by thier servers,
>and believe me, there is NO configuration given for the ethernet card.
You are supposed to use a private IP address then.
>Or ifconfig ethX up with no IP, as in my case, so AFAICT, the postinst
>should detect if an Ethernet card is up, and if it is, try to probe
>for a concentrator. If the card is not yet up with an IP, the
>ppp-udeb.postinst script should just up it, wiithout an IP. At least
>that's how it seems logical to me.
But it's not. I already explained how this should be implemented.
>> You do not *need* an IP address on the interface but *should* have one.
>> And as you noticed, always configuring it is simpler.
>No, I *have* observed that an "ifconfig ethX up" which will result in
>a interface which is up, but has no IP, is enough for the probing to
>happen correctly.
Which is what I wrote.
>So the question remains, how does one determine which interfaces were
>brought up by the ppp-udeb script (probably simple, as they might be
>ones with no IP set) and which are they associated to (more difficult
>for multiple ppp connections)? Bonus points for the association in
>subsequent runs of the postinst.
I do not understand what you mean.
>> >I tested an installation and:
>> >1) the ppp related stuff was not installed by default
>> It is supposed to be.
>by whom?
d-i.
>> >2) the configuration of pppoe on the target system was not the same as
>> >the one in the d-i envronment.
>> I do not know what this means, but the d-i configuration will work in
>> the installed system as well.
>The question is still "who will put the configuration there, in the
>target system?".
Yet another script.
--
ciao,
Marco
Reply to: