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

Re: Bug#224742: Related to this issue...

On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 09:43:27AM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:
> There are IMHO.  To resume them:
>  1) Parameterless lines can be useful when a parameter made no sense

Parameterless lines do *nothing* more than a line with a dummy parameter
in this case.

>  2) I added that I would like ifupdown to stop enforcing not to have
>     repeated lines, with an example of when such a case would be useful

That's equally well done by having the parameters on the same line; ie

	test foo bar
	test foo
	test bar

It's also equally well done by having differently named parameters:

	test1 foo
	test2 bar

>  3) I repeatedly asked for technical reasons why you didn't want to
>     change ifupdown accordingly, and I was ready to discuss them, and
>     maybe accept them, but you never provided any

That's a complaint, not a technical reason for something to happen. The
difference should be pretty obvious.

>  4) I showed you examples of other programs accessing
>     /etc/network/interfaces and proposed considering a wider role for it

No changes to the file are necessary for that to happen; and more
importantly the file belongs to ifupdown, and if other programs wish to
use it, they get to follow ifupdown's rules. If you want a configuration
file that works differently, you get to create one of your own.

> I would have handled it differently, having received more cooperation
> from you.  

Ah, yes, of course it's all my fault. Not a thing you could have done
differently considering the horrible things that have been done to
you. Perhaps you need some grief counselling?

> For the records, a proposed way to handle this could be:

"Ask for the feature. Get told how to do it differently. Do it differently."


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

               Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we can.
           http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004

Attachment: pgphfKStHefZj.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: