MultiProtocol per interface support (was Re: LFS-6.0 print process)

DJ Lucas dj at
Fri Jul 9 07:27:05 PDT 2004

Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> Nathan Coulson wrote:
>> When I proposed that to some people on IRC, they said it was unnecessary
>> bloat...  [I admit, I do not entirely understand their complaints]. 
>> That's how we got the SERVICE="static, pppoe, ipx" idea...
>> (I dont want to go ahead and commit something that nobody really 
>> wanted...
>>  and when I posted it to the list, nobody replied to it)
> You have my vote for a directory-based ifconfig system; I was only 
> pushing the alternative to appease those who were vehemently opposed to 
> the directory-based idea :-)

I don't remember anyone being opposed to the directory-based ifconfig. 
I looked back at my IRC logs and all I seen was about 15 lines on it. 
Three of which were me saying that I liked it. :-)  Now I did mention 
the possibility of it being considered bloat ("a bit overkill for simple 
setups"), but don't see it as such.

-- DJ Lucas

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list