On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 23:25 +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> I would like to make an upload to stable in order to fix some bugs in
> ifupdown-extra which were not detected and fixed in time for the Squeeze
> release.
>
> Please find attached the full patch between this new package version and the
> version 0.14 currently in Squeeze with my proposed changes. A summary of them
> is:
>
> - fixed location of the ethtool binary which changed in the ethtool package
> from lenny to squeeze
> - fix the location of the default configuration file for routes to match
> were the scripts look for it
> - fix parsing errors in the configuration file
Thanks for working on this. I have a couple of (hopefully) quick
queries on the diff.
The last of the changes in the list above has this changelog entry
associated with it:
+ * if-up-scripts/static-routes:
+ - Fix typo that prevent the script from adding routes as it expected them
+ to have 'reject' when they shouldn't. Thanks to Mathieu Parent and
+ to Petru Ratiu for the patches. (Closes: #613632, #458395) (LP:
#631533)
but actually appears to both fix a bug (the inverted sense of the
"reject" test) and introduce new functionality relative to the current
version in stable, namely the adding of routes which _do_ have "reject"
associated with them. Is that correct?
The second query is more of a comment really. I appreciate that this
isn't a regression from the previous matching code, but it seems to me
that this:
add_static_routes() {
- cat $ROUTEFILE | egrep "${IFACE}$" |
+ cat $ROUTEFILE | egrep "^[^#].*${IFACE}$" |
will match a line of "foo bareth0" in the route file where $IFACE
contains "eth0". I'm not sure if this is an issue in practical use of
the package though.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/1307992907.3563.19.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
