On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:09:59PM +0300, Regid Ichira wrote: > Can I remove /etc/network/run manually? Just /etc/network/run. Not > /run/network. > > I don't have /etc/network/run.dpkg-old. I understand that the writer > of that code fragment was cautious about various linkage methods. I > tried to follow the logic of the code, but failed. For example, > why is there an explicit > > ln -s /run/network /etc/network/run
The ultimate goal of this block of code is to end up with the ifupdown state in /run/network, and /etc/network/run symlinked to /run/network. /etc/network/run used to be symlinked to somewhere writable, and so could be configured as the sysadmin saw fit. Now we have /run, this is no longer configurable: we always place the state in /run/network, and so the symlink is updated to reflect the new reality. The code is complex out of necessity--we support a number of different variants, and need to make sure we upgrade all of them properly (e.g. it could be a symlink or a directory). While ifupdown itself now uses /run/network exclusively, I think the symlink is left in place to cater for any tools which might want to look there, so as to not break backward compatibility. I would suspect it will be removed in jessie after we've made sure that no users remain. For now, it's probably best to leave it in place (though it is likely perfectly OK to remove, best not to do so until we've tested this as a supported configuration). It's not doing any harm even if it's unused. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools `- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120904162030.gn3...@codelibre.net
