On 23.06.2015 14:48, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
>> E.g. virtual CAN interfaces (vcan.c) now print this @NONE and they never have
>> a (physical?) link. So you probably have to deal with different virtual
>> interfaces anyway, right?
> Yes, with the current code, all virtual interfaces (that define a
>
Le 21/06/2015 00:58, Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
On 06/17/2015 09:26 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
Le 16/06/2015 19:35, Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
On 15.06.2015 17:54, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:13:12 +0200
Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
Theoretically, virtual interfaces should adv
On 06/17/2015 09:26 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> Le 16/06/2015 19:35, Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
>> On 15.06.2015 17:54, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>> On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:13:12 +0200
>>> Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
>>>
Theoretically, virtual interfaces should advertise an IFLA_LINK to 0.
I
Le 16/06/2015 19:35, Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
On 15.06.2015 17:54, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:13:12 +0200
Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
Theoretically, virtual interfaces should advertise an IFLA_LINK to 0.
I don't know what is the best fix:
- patching iproute2 to avoid this
On 16.06.2015 19:35, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
ps. will apply the patch from Nicolas if it fixes the ip output.
No it didn't - I have no bridging configured in my kernel %-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
On 15.06.2015 17:54, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:13:12 +0200
Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
Theoretically, virtual interfaces should advertise an IFLA_LINK to 0.
I don't know what is the best fix:
- patching iproute2 to avoid this '@NONE'
- patching the kernel (see below).
On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:13:12 +0200
Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> Theoretically, virtual interfaces should advertise an IFLA_LINK to 0.
> I don't know what is the best fix:
> - patching iproute2 to avoid this '@NONE'
> - patching the kernel (see below).
Sorry this is an ABI change. The kernel has
Le 15/06/2015 09:23, Nicolas Dichtel a écrit :
Le 14/06/2015 21:12, Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
@Nicolas: Just saw that you were not responsible for the @NONE m)
Sorry.
Btw. do you know why this @NONE stuff just emerged in 4.1-rc ?
Yes, it comes from the iflink cleanup in kernel:
http://git.ker
Le 14/06/2015 21:12, Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
@Nicolas: Just saw that you were not responsible for the @NONE m)
Sorry.
Btw. do you know why this @NONE stuff just emerged in 4.1-rc ?
Yes, it comes from the iflink cleanup in kernel:
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
@Nicolas: Just saw that you were not responsible for the @NONE m)
Sorry.
Btw. do you know why this @NONE stuff just emerged in 4.1-rc ?
Regards,
Oliver
On 14.06.2015 20:50, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
On 14.06.2015 12:00, Ulrich Gemkow wrote:
between Linux 4.0.5 and 4.1-rc7 the name as shown by
On 14.06.2015 12:00, Ulrich Gemkow wrote:
between Linux 4.0.5 and 4.1-rc7 the name as shown by "ip link show"
of bridge interfaces (and at least the dummy interface) changed from
(i.e.) br1 to br1@NONE.
This breaks (at least for me :-) userspace (ip link show parsing
scripts). It is easy to sol
Hello,
between Linux 4.0.5 and 4.1-rc7 the name as shown by "ip link show"
of bridge interfaces (and at least the dummy interface) changed from
(i.e.) br1 to br1@NONE.
This breaks (at least for me :-) userspace (ip link show parsing
scripts). It is easy to solve, so not a big problem. I am using
12 matches
Mail list logo
