Le jeudi 30 août 2012 à 22:19 +0200, Wouter Verhelst a écrit : > On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 10:44:11AM +0200, Andrew Shadura wrote: > > How do you suppose it's possible to undo arbitrary network > > configuration done by arbitrary set of tools when there's no central > > place to hold such information (and can't possibly be)? > > Actually, the kernel holds that information. Any tool can just query the > kernel for information, and decide what to do with what's returned.
Yes it does, but does it hold it in a meaningful, structured way? In complex setups, for example, there might be no certain way to say which interface is related to which route. Or to tell which low-level interface another interface depends on (think tunnels managed by userland tools). Actually if there was at least a *standard*, low-level (or in-kernel) tool to return structured information about the current network configuration, maybe high-level network tools (such as ifupdown and NM) could be redesigned in a completely different, much more compatible, way. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1346399787.3479.451.camel@pi0307572
