On 01/01/2006 11:35:19 AM, Jon Hart wrote:
The BNF seems to indicate that what you are trying to do is legal
syntax-wise. At one point I had an ifstated.conf that did something
similiar with a master "switch state" that was the target of
init-state
-- it would help determine what the correct initial state of ifstated
was.
Exactly, the initialization of the state machine is not clearly
documented. How is it that when I remove the INIT{} block from
the given config, taking the set-state out of the init block,
that a set-state actually gets executed when ifstated starts?
The body is not supposed to get executed until a state changes,
and nothing has changed on the interfaces.
Always executing the
body of the initial state on ifstated startup is ok, which is
what _seems_ to be happening. But it's not
documented and it does not make for a particularly clean state
machine implimentation, I think. Suppose you want to have a state
that represents ifstated startup, which is left (forever) as soon
as an interface changes? I feel like I simply poked at my
ifstated.conf with a stick until the state at daemon start turned out
right, which does not give me a high degree of confidence in
my config.
Karl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
