On 02/12/2013 01:42 AM, Matt Burgess wrote: > On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 01:10 +0100, Armin K. wrote: > >> Well, I am trying to keep LFS and LFS Systemd as close as possible - >> that's all. In that case, we would just need to change ENABLE_LOG=0 in >> init-functioins for systemd branch. > > OK then, at least I understood it correctly :-) The patch is fine for > trunk. For the systemd branch, feel free to re-create the bootscripts > directory and pop the patched init-functions back in there. You may > want to bring make-aux-files.sh and aux-files-data.sh back across to > that branch as well, and the relevant Makefile snippets that trigger the > bootscripts tarball build. > > Going back to the ifup/ifdown thing, feel free to commit those back to > the systemd branch as well. > > As for the ifupdown@.service unit, have distros standardized on that? > I'd prefer to call it something like ifctl@.service, if possible. It > just feels more correct to say: > > systemd disable ifctl@eth0 > > Saying 'systemd disable ifupdown@eth0' seems confusing as you've got the > word up alongside the words disable and down. In addition, you've got > both 'disable' and 'down' there, duplicating the action to take. > > That said, I'd prefer consistency with existing distros direction on > this than getting correct according to my taste. > > Regards, > > Matt. > >
Debian package for low level network management is called ifupdown and they use it. We can use ifup@whatever if needed ... Hell, you can call it whatever you like. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
