Menu
▾
▴
devil-linux-develop
|
From: Roland P. <pa...@ta...> - 2004-03-19 15:27:51
|
Hi, I looked through the pending feature requests, found these: 2002-12-04 20:52 [ 648606 ] split /etc/sysconfig/config move the "START_FOO" stuff to another file we could use software.start as file name and then rename the software file to software.install Is this still an issue? I'd suggest moving START_FOO and the variables DAEMON, PARAMETERS, ... from the /etc/init.d/ scripts into /etc/sysconfig/foo . Would make it look more tidy perhaps ;-) [ 564057 ] ifconfig -> ip switch from the ifconfig command in the network script to the ip command. All occasion of ifconfig in /etc/init.d/network can be easily changed to ip, except for the setting of the hardware mac address. ip can't do this, I am not even aware of any program except ifconfig that can do this... comments? Roland -- ICQ UIN 49339118 Linux Counter #88774 GPG-Key 1024D/59C6AFA6 2003-02-07 Roland Pabel <ro...@pa...> |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2004-03-20 17:05:28
|
Roland Pabel wrote: > Hi, > I looked through the pending feature requests, found these: > > 2002-12-04 20:52 > [ 648606 ] split /etc/sysconfig/config > move the "START_FOO" stuff to another file > we could use software.start as file name and then > rename the software file to software.install > > Is this still an issue? I still like this, to get the stuff a little more organized. > I'd suggest moving START_FOO and the variables DAEMON, PARAMETERS, ... from > the /etc/init.d/ scripts into /etc/sysconfig/foo . Would make it look more > tidy perhaps ;-) I wouldn't do this, I think we should leave it in the init scripts. > [ 564057 ] ifconfig -> ip > switch from the ifconfig command in the network script > to the ip command. > > All occasion of ifconfig in /etc/init.d/network can be easily changed to ip, > except for the setting of the hardware mac address. ip can't do this, I am > not even aware of any program except ifconfig that can do this... > comments? I'm not sure if we really should do this changes (yeah I know I suggested it... ;-) ). Any opinions about it? Heiko |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2004-03-20 23:46:49
|
> > I looked through the pending feature requests, found these: > > > > 2002-12-04 20:52 > > [ 648606 ] split /etc/sysconfig/config > > move the "START_FOO" stuff to another file > > we could use software.start as file name and then > > rename the software file to software.install > > > > Is this still an issue? > > I still like this, to get the stuff a little more organized. Personally I'd leave it. I'd rather search for something inside a big config file, instead of trying to find the file containing the info. And I don't think it's too cluttered yet, by any means. If someone does move it, the setup program AND the upgrade-to-a-new-release process will need to be changed. > > I'd suggest moving START_FOO and the variables DAEMON, PARAMETERS, ... from > > the /etc/init.d/ scripts into /etc/sysconfig/foo . Would make it look more > > tidy perhaps ;-) > > I wouldn't do this, I think we should leave it in the init scripts. Yeah, leave them. > > [ 564057 ] ifconfig -> ip > > switch from the ifconfig command in the network script > > to the ip command. > > > > All occasion of ifconfig in /etc/init.d/network can be easily changed to ip, > > except for the setting of the hardware mac address. ip can't do this, I am > > not even aware of any program except ifconfig that can do this... > > comments? > > I'm not sure if we really should do this changes (yeah I know I > suggested it... ;-) ). > Any opinions about it? I don't see a need for a change. - BS |
|
From: Roland P. <pa...@ta...> - 2004-03-21 00:22:13
|
On Sunday 21 March 2004 00:46, Bruce Smith wrote: [...] > > Personally I'd leave it. I'd rather search for something inside a big > config file, instead of trying to find the file containing the info. > And I don't think it's too cluttered yet, by any means. > > If someone does move it, the setup program AND the > upgrade-to-a-new-release process will need to be changed. Yes, that was holding me back too ( lazy as I am ;-) > > > I'd suggest moving START_FOO and the variables DAEMON, PARAMETERS, ... > > > from the /etc/init.d/ scripts into /etc/sysconfig/foo . Would make it > > > look more tidy perhaps ;-) > > > > I wouldn't do this, I think we should leave it in the init scripts. > > Yeah, leave them. > > > > [ 564057 ] ifconfig -> ip > > > switch from the ifconfig command in the network script > > > to the ip command. > > > > > > All occasion of ifconfig in /etc/init.d/network can be easily changed > > > to ip, except for the setting of the hardware mac address. ip can't do > > > this, I am not even aware of any program except ifconfig that can do > > > this... comments? > > > > I'm not sure if we really should do this changes (yeah I know I > > suggested it... ;-) ). > > Any opinions about it? > > I don't see a need for a change. I was just asking because I saw them in the list. There are not many feature requests which are not "add this program". Are there any 'real' features missing to be in the next release? Or will 1.2.0 just come out when Heiko is tired of typing 1.1.9-rc5-pre7 ? ;-) Roland -- ICQ UIN 49339118 Linux Counter #88774 GPG-Key 1024D/59C6AFA6 2003-02-07 Roland Pabel <ro...@pa...> |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2004-03-21 16:36:16
|
Roland Pabel wrote: > On Sunday 21 March 2004 00:46, Bruce Smith wrote: > [...] > >>Personally I'd leave it. I'd rather search for something inside a big >>config file, instead of trying to find the file containing the info. >>And I don't think it's too cluttered yet, by any means. >> >>If someone does move it, the setup program AND the >>upgrade-to-a-new-release process will need to be changed. > > > Yes, that was holding me back too ( lazy as I am ;-) > > >>>>I'd suggest moving START_FOO and the variables DAEMON, PARAMETERS, ... >>>>from the /etc/init.d/ scripts into /etc/sysconfig/foo . Would make it >>>>look more tidy perhaps ;-) >>> >>>I wouldn't do this, I think we should leave it in the init scripts. >> >>Yeah, leave them. >> >> >>>>[ 564057 ] ifconfig -> ip >>>>switch from the ifconfig command in the network script >>>> to the ip command. >>>> >>>>All occasion of ifconfig in /etc/init.d/network can be easily changed >>>>to ip, except for the setting of the hardware mac address. ip can't do >>>>this, I am not even aware of any program except ifconfig that can do >>>>this... comments? >>> >>>I'm not sure if we really should do this changes (yeah I know I >>>suggested it... ;-) ). >>>Any opinions about it? >> >>I don't see a need for a change. > > I was just asking because I saw them in the list. There are not many feature > requests which are not "add this program". Are there any 'real' features > missing to be in the next release? Or will 1.2.0 just come out when Heiko is > tired of typing 1.1.9-rc5-pre7 ? ;-) Actually we didn't set a limit to the numbers, so we probably could go up to 1.1.999999-rc999 ;-) I don't know what you guys think, but I wanted to wait another 2-3 months before I approach 1.2. Of course if I have to keep patching the older kernel I vote for an earlier release. Heiko |
|
From: Diego T. <dt...@co...> - 2004-03-21 17:21:04
|
On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 11:33:35AM -0500, Heiko Zuerker wrote: > I don't know what you guys think, but I wanted to wait another 2-3 > months before I approach 1.2. Of course if I have to keep patching the > older kernel I vote for an earlier release. samba3.0.2a + 2.4.25 has solved the last issue i got with my network card, so for me it was ok to release. but now, with the pcmcia problem... i don't know... -- -- gnupg keyfingerprint -- 48AF 5BF9 8F54 2966 64CC 2327 7CD0 DD91 B09D 5799 -- Use of a keyboard or mouse may be linked to serious injuries or disorders. Diego Torres - dtorres at anthalia dot org - Madrid / España |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2004-03-21 17:30:49
|
> > I was just asking because I saw them in the list. There are not many feature > > requests which are not "add this program". Are there any 'real' features > > missing to be in the next release? Or will 1.2.0 just come out when Heiko is > > tired of typing 1.1.9-rc5-pre7 ? ;-) > > Actually we didn't set a limit to the numbers, so we probably could go > up to 1.1.999999-rc999 ;-) > > I don't know what you guys think, but I wanted to wait another 2-3 > months before I approach 1.2. Of course if I have to keep patching the > older kernel I vote for an earlier release. I'm in no big hurry for an upgrade. A few months is fine with me. - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2004-03-21 20:20:18
|
Bruce Smith wrote: >>>I was just asking because I saw them in the list. There are not many feature >>>requests which are not "add this program". Are there any 'real' features >>>missing to be in the next release? Or will 1.2.0 just come out when Heiko is >>>tired of typing 1.1.9-rc5-pre7 ? ;-) >> >>Actually we didn't set a limit to the numbers, so we probably could go >>up to 1.1.999999-rc999 ;-) >> >>I don't know what you guys think, but I wanted to wait another 2-3 >>months before I approach 1.2. Of course if I have to keep patching the >>older kernel I vote for an earlier release. > > > I'm in no big hurry for an upgrade. A few months is fine with me. I'm pretty sure we get some more good ideas over the next few months. Also from my side, there's some changes going on with all the PAX security stuff, which I would like to use. Heiko |
|
From: Diego T. <dt...@co...> - 2004-03-21 20:23:31
|
On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 03:16:00PM -0500, Heiko Zuerker wrote: > I'm pretty sure we get some more good ideas over the next few months. > > Also from my side, there's some changes going on with all the PAX > security stuff, which I would like to use. do you apply all the security stuff at the same time? (that is, grsec, pax, stackprotector etc) ? -- -- gnupg keyfingerprint -- 48AF 5BF9 8F54 2966 64CC 2327 7CD0 DD91 B09D 5799 -- Use of a keyboard or mouse may be linked to serious injuries or disorders. Diego Torres - dtorres at anthalia dot org - Madrid / España |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2004-03-21 20:46:50
|
Diego Torres wrote: > On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 03:16:00PM -0500, Heiko Zuerker wrote: > >>I'm pretty sure we get some more good ideas over the next few months. >> >>Also from my side, there's some changes going on with all the PAX >>security stuff, which I would like to use. > > > do you apply all the security stuff at the same time? (that is, grsec, pax, stackprotector etc) ? > Yes, the more the better. ;-) Heiko |
