On Wednesday 23 April 2008 21:46:18 Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 04:21:27PM +0100, Roy Marples wrote: > > OK, it seems that hard lines in multipart configs seem to be an issue, so > > I'm doing this now. > > > > For a summary of why we're using hard lines you can read this thread > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/45756/focus=45765 > > Do you plan to reimplement parsing of the complete ip syntax for > addresses and routes?
Not at all. If I did then we're back to using newlines. Basically we need something like ipaddrs=address1 address2 address3 for addresses, and routes=dest gateway dest gateway dest gateway or routes=route1 route2 route3 route1=dest gateway route2=dest gateway route3=dest gateway for routes There will be no special ip or ifconfig parsing - it's a pita. especially trying to mange 2 variants of linux ifconfig onto iproute2 (and back) and trying to get the same style to work with BSD ifconfig. Been there, too much pain. So it's the simple route. Want anything more powerful, well we have the direct ifconfig_eth0= ip_eth0= directives. And if they don't work then use a pre-up. > > See my attached example from work, we use a lot of the various options > on stuff. No, we won't support that. However, we will bring back ip ranges for the last ocet like so 1.2.3.4-10/24 After seeing that I take it you'ed vote for the BSD named routing style? Thanks Roy -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
