conathan at conet.dyndns.org
Sun Jul 11 16:18:25 PDT 2004
> On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:19:28 -0600 (MDT)
> "Nathan Coulson" <conathan at conet.dyndns.org> wrote:
>> I am not sure, yet. I would like to see it as a directory in LFS, as
>> it gives us the opportunity to use kevin's static route service
>> instead of the GATEWAY= line. (Which is not in the bootscripts yet,
>> it's up to matt.
> heh, if there's two things I understand/know the least it's networking
> and bootscripts. So, now I have to make a decision about a networking
> bootscript? Yikes :)
> Seriously, if everyone involved in the discussion is happy with the
> solution(s) put forward (I'm thinking namely Archaic, DJ, Nathan, Kevin,
> Bryan) then I'm happy for them to go into testing. It certainly sounds
> as if they're a) suitable and b) doable. As far as the directory setup
> goes, I'm fine with that. I personally don't care about backward
> compatibility here - we're on a major version bump here, so if we can
> chuck out some old stuff we've just been dragging along with us for a
> while, then I see this as a prime opportunity to do so.
> Cheers folks,
mv ifconfig.eth0 OLD
mv OLD ifconfig.eth0/ipv4
ifup eth0 ipv4 will start it.
on bootup, theoretically it should find it.
I was just going to make sure -pre2 worked like I expected with the
network changes. [Pre1, I believe was golden, Pre2 I dont trust yet...]
More information about the lfs-dev