On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 01:10 +0100, Kolbjørn Barmen wrote: > On Thu, 25 Nov 2010, Bjørn Mork wrote: > > > Module parameters for modules that are built into the kernel image > > are specified on the kernel command line with the module name plus > > '.' plus parameter name, with '=' and value if appropriate, such as: > > > > usbcore.blinkenlights=1 > > </quote> > > Sure, but it's not really particularly practical or elegant to fill up > the bootparameters. With ipv6 as a module, one do only need to distribute > a /etc/modprobe.d/ipv6.conf to everyone and and be done with it. With > kernel parameters I need to worry about alot more. > > Having kernel modules is a feature, very practical one. > Are there any practical reason for having IPv6 support in the kernel > opposed to having it as a module? I cannot really think of any. There are performance and security benefits to building code as non- modular. There is also a cost, of course, where it isn't used. But over the lifetime of 'squeeze' we expect to see IPv6 being used far more widely. In any case, this decision was made some time ago and will not be changed for 'squeeze' so you will have to live with it. [snip rant] > > How about using pre-up? Wouldn't that always work? > > Certainly should. I remember having played with "pre-up", but do not > remember why I ended up with "up" instead. Anything that doesn't depend on having the hardware running can be put in pre-up. > Anyways, it's just a work around, what if you use network-manager > instead for example? Network Manager is there to make network configuration easy for ordinary users administering their own PCs. It is not supposed to support every possible configuration, e.g. it has no support for bonding or VLAN configuration either. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part