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

Re: ifupdown's changed hook handling breaks other packages.

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 09:36:48AM +0200, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> > It sounds to me that you have broken this behavior on purpose, where
> > you could instead have added an interface to make disabling an
> > interface more convenient than sed hackery (as mandated by policy).
> No. Also I'd like to remind you that this sed hackery has already been
> done by NM maintainers without much discussions on how to make it
> better.

Let's stop the mutual accusation part of this thread.

To avoid similar issues to arise again in the future, I wonder, would it
be feasible to implement something like Joss mentioned, i.e. some sort
of ifupdown blessed mechanism to enable/disable interfaces? The need of
doing so exists, NM is an example of that. Enabling people to do so
without _having_ to rely on text file fiddling would be an improvement
over the status quo.

(Arguably, this part of the discussion {c,s}ould be moved to the BTS.)

Stefano Zacchiroli     zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences   ......   http://upsilon.cc/zack   ......   . . o
Debian Project Leader    .......   @zack on identi.ca   .......    o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: