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

Re: Bug#19133: distributed-net: support PPP -- /etc/ppp/ip-up.d/distributed-net wanted



I don't know how, but I'm somehow receiving your e-mails and I've never
subsribed to any debian mailing list... any explanation?

Adam P. Harris wrote:

> [You (Manoj Srivastava)]
> >>>"aph" == aph  <aph@debian.org> writes:
> >
> >aph> To support users on PPP links, I suggest you add a conffile shell
> >aph> script in /etc/ppp/ip-up.d/distributed-net.  A possible version
> >aph> of that file:
> >
> >>> !/bin/sh
> >
> >aph> [ -x /usr/bin/distributed-net ] && distributed-net -update
> >
> >       Please do not implement the ip-up script exactly like that,
> > since it would suddenly start doing stuff at every net connection on
> > upgrade. Instead, have the script read a file in /etc/ppp (details to
> > be determined on debian-policy) and look for /^distributed-net.*UP=YES/
> > or exit silently.
>
> This is silly.  It's a conffile, if you want it turned off, then chmod
> a-x it.  If you want it shipped turned off, then ship it without the
> execute bit.  Why add more debian-specific, PPP-specific infrastructure
> for well-established 'run-parts' type infrastructure.  Why have yet
> another file to parse thru and understand and submit bugs against when we
> have 'chmod' and 'rm' and the conffiles mechism?
>
> >       The default should be OFF, since nothing is put in the file at
> > all. If the sysadmin wants it, they can edit in the configuration
> > file.
>
> See above.  Certainly possible  I am not adversed to shipping it mode
> 0644 rather than 0755....
>
> >       Most sites have cron jobs set up already.
>
> You might be confused.  The only cron job that is at all obliquely
> connected to distributed-net is a weekly log rotation.
>
> OTOH, I might be confused in the sense that I don't know how my proposed
> script would interact with an already running distributed-net.  Would it
> kick up another daemon?  Is there just a signal to send it to tell it to
> flush the queue?  Is there a way on link downage to tell it to not even
> try to hit the key server?
>
> All questions I leave up to the maintainer to address or shrug off as the
> maintainer sees fit.
>
> .....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>




Reply to: