On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 16:36 +0000, Duncan wrote: > Well, several services already have a "basic" setup using named vars, > then something like Richard's suggested Options_eth0= as a (normally > commented) catch-all for anything advanced that the admin wishes to pass > "raw". IMO the standard network stuff is well defined enough for that, > perhaps with a couple of mode-toggles and/or counters thrown in. (A > counter like eth0_number_IPs= could default to one, for instance, but set > to something higher and with the appropriate number of address_N_eth0= > lines, it'd then cover your 5-address example, without having to worry > about figuring out how many there are, since it's a given.) > > I think that's what many of us would like and what this subthread is > asking for, truth be told, but I also realize it's going to be more work > setting it up -- but OTOH should be simpler for the user to setup so > perhaps less bugs to deal with and the documentation in the net sample > file should be somewhat simpler as well. The more work thing is why I've > not requested it before, but it'd be nice, and with others mentioning it > now too, now's the time to speak up if I'm going to. =8^)
Fair enough, but one of the goals of baselayout-2 is to support baselayout-1 configs where possible if the shell is still bash. I'm striving to support similar configs for non bash shells so that there's not much of a learning curve. Yes we could have a totally new non compatible setup, but that would really suck hard for upgraders yes? Thanks Roy -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
