Re: /etc/init.d/network is too simple?

[Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com>]

Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> Adam, I'm Cc'ing you directly because you've been one of the bigger
> agitators for roving profiles, and I'm curious as to your opinion on
> how well/badly the following would work.

I read through it.  I like it in general, but have a few questions:

  * does it allow incremental implementation (i.e., something simple
    to start with)? This is important for working thru the design in a
    practical (real-world setting).  I would think it would...

  * can packages extend the format or understand the format without
    requiring changes in the rest of the system?  How do you see this
    implemented.

  * is there a way that arbitrary scripts can be run, and, based on
    the result, different network configurations put into place?  This
    is good for PCMCIA setups.  I.e., if there is a pingable host on
    the network, 192.168.33.1, then do configuration 'foo', if there
    is a response to a dhcp bcast, use that, etc etc.

I think someone should take a look at how RedHat does it.  They use,
uh, I think /etc/sysconfig/network or some such.  They do allow
branching.  There scheme, RedHat users tell me, is perhaps overcomplex
and obscure -- hopefully we can meet our features without falling into
that.

--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>