Bug#554194: ifupdown virtual package name and mass-filing (if accepted)
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:11:58AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 06:09:19PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > an interface up or down, consistently with configuration, and exit
> > > with non-zero if either operation fails.
> >
> > Is ifup "eth0=foo" supported ?
>
> Should be fairly easy to add that to ipcfg, which might be a good idea.
> Let's make that part of the interface, too.
OK.
> > > - may provide a virtual interface name that does not map to an actual
> > > physical interface name, but instead uses internal logic to decide
> > > what to do.
> >
> > Is not there a namespace issues wrt other interface that should be clarified ?
>
> There are namespace issues, but I don't think they should be explained
> in the interface specification; the tools should do so in their
> documentation.
I mention it to avoid e.g. eth0=foo to have a very different meaning in
each implementation.
> > > - ifup and ifdown should support a '-v' or '--verbose' option to aid in
> > > debugging.
> >
> > This requirement does not feel necessary.
>
> If a tool calls ifup, it may wish to call it with -v to provide some
> output to the user should bringing the interface up fail, which can be
> useful. Perhaps it should be clarified that the output format of -v is
> undefined.
OK then. The point is that it should be safe to call 'ifup -v' to get some
detail (if any).
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: