Simplifying the LFS Bootscripts

Jim Gifford lfs at
Sat Jan 8 17:50:15 PST 2005

Nathan Coulson wrote:

>on lfs-support, some people want to simplify the lfs bootscripts.
>some things that have been stated
>a) the createfiles code is complex
>b) in cleanfs, the code for removing files is overly complex
>my own observations
>a) the functions file is rather complex and long
>b) ipv4-static and ipv4-static-route, adding parameters by checking
>functions is not all that clear
>c) ifup and ifdown, all the do is run another script.  They have also
>got overly complex
>things I think we can easly get rid of, to simplify the scripts
>a) createfiles could be moved to BLFS
>b) ifup and ifdown check for onboot, we could move that check over to
>network again, and take out the hotplug check [People report it does
>not work as I expect anyway].
>c) could simplify ifup and ifdown, if they "only" check for
>/etc/sysconfig/ifconfig.eth0/*, and do not check for additional
>options for individual scripts
>things others have commented on, but I dont know enough about
>a) Kevin says that ip up "interface" check in ifup will cause problems
>with ppp, and other simular protocols
>Please comment on this, as people rarely comment on the state of the bootscripts
>Nathan Coulson (conathan)
>nathan at linuxfromscratch org
>conathan at gmail com
    When we were designing these scripts, we did not take ppp and 
connection oriented protocols in mind, since most of them are controlled 
via a dial script, so what does it have to do with ifup and ifdown, 
nothing.  That's a BLFS issue not a LFS issue, because other software is 
required to boot them ie ppp and a dialer.

    Createfiles should stay, just better documentation in the script, I 
can help with that.

    ifup and ifdown are fine, they work great, I wouldn't change a thing.

    We could give BLFS our template script to follow, so that they 
follow the same format, and even assist them in converting there current 
scripts to match the format, so not as many changes would need to be 
made. Again, I know I'm willing to help and others are to.

    What you have is a working project, I don't really care about I18N 
stuff, and I have mentioned this several times, that should be a hint 
and not a BLFS or LFS issue at all, but no one wants to create such a  

    I have really appreciated what you have done

jim at
lfs at

LFS User # 2577
Registered Linux User # 299986

FWD: 275410
IPKall: 360-968-1517

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list