Bug#706197: marked as done (support eth delay parameter)
Your message dated Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:56:23 +0200
with message-id <51C14807.9080407@progress-technologies.net>
and subject line Re: support eth delay parameter
has caused the Debian Bug report #706197,
regarding support eth delay parameter
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
706197: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=706197
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: live-boot
Severity: wishlist
On 04/25/2013 04:24 PM, Vasiliy Tolstov wrote:
> Hello.
> I have diskless server with two eth.
> Eth0 appeared on sysfs is about 15 secs early then eth1, but only eth1
> have link to boot server.
> If i specify live-boot=eth1 it skips because search finds only one nic.
> How can i avoid this and wait then link up if i specify live-boot eth
> device?
> I'm use 3.0 version of live-boot?
currently you can't, but we should add support for a custom delay in
live-boot 4.x for such situations.
> --
> Vasiliy Tolstov
> xmpp: vase@selfip.ru <mailto:vase@selfip.ru>
> email: v.tolstov@selfip.ru <mailto:v.tolstov@selfip.ru>
--
Address: Daniel Baumann, Donnerbuehlweg 3, CH-3012 Bern
Email: daniel.baumann@progress-technologies.net
Internet: http://people.progress-technologies.net/~daniel.baumann/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 3.0~a2-1
This is actually supported since above version through the
ethdevice-timeout= parameter.
--
Address: Daniel Baumann, Donnerbuehlweg 3, CH-3012 Bern
Email: daniel.baumann@progress-technologies.net
Internet: http://people.progress-technologies.net/~daniel.baumann/
--- End Message ---
Reply to: