martin f krafft wrote:
> Can a hook in /etc/hotplug.d stop /sbin/hotplug from executing the
> rest of the scripts? In that case, ifrename could just call
> /sbin/hotplug again, or submit a uevent to the PF_NETLINK socket,
> causing hotplug to call all hook again.
Call this 'option #4'.
Too ugly,
severity 295514 wishlist
severity 294111 wishlist
severity 267007 wishlist
severity 295520 wishlist
tags 245435 - wontfix
tags 267007 - wontfix
merge 294111 295514 245435
merge 267007 295520
thanks
> Probably not an option, if all goes well /sbin/hotplug will be replaced
> with a daemon listenin
On Feb 18, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This will not happen, hotplug-ng uses a C program and anyway on udev
> > systems udevsend will be used as the hotplug multiplexer.
> > OTOH, when udevsend is used then udev should be able to rename the
> > interfaces before other hotplug script
also sprach Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.18.0942 +0100]:
> There is another option, actually (call it 'option #3') which is
> for ifrename to wrap /sbin/hotplug with a script that runs
> ifrename, changes INTERFACE and execs the original /sbin/hotplug.
[...]
> If we want ifrename to wor
> also sprach Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.2125 +0100]:
> > > also sprach Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.2111 +0100]:
> > > > * hotplug should run ifrename and call ifplugd.hotplug and
> > > > waproamd.hotplug with INTERFACE set to the new name
> > > > or else
> > > >
also sprach Jean Tourrilhes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.2145 +0100]:
> The only syntax changes that I could imagine is changes to
> make it easier to integrate with hotplug (this was actually the reason
> I rewrote nameif which did not integrate in hotplug). If you have
> suggestions, let
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 09:37:23PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
>
> If ifrename's syntax changes, only
> hotplug needs to be changed.
The only syntax changes that I could imagine is changes to
make it easier to integrate with hotplug (this was actually the reason
I rewrote nameif which d
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 21:26 +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.2111 +0100]:
> > * hotplug should run ifrename and call ifplugd.hotplug and
> > waproamd.hotplug with INTERFACE set to the new name
> > or else
> > * ifplugd.hotplug and waproamd.ho
also sprach Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.2125 +0100]:
> > also sprach Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.2111 +0100]:
> > > * hotplug should run ifrename and call ifplugd.hotplug and
> > > waproamd.hotplug with INTERFACE set to the new name
> > > or else
> > > * ifplugd.ho
also sprach Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.2111 +0100]:
> * hotplug should run ifrename and call ifplugd.hotplug and
> waproamd.hotplug with INTERFACE set to the new name
> or else
> * ifplugd.hotplug and waproamd.hotplug should each call ifrename
> for the interface named in INTER
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 15:17 +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> The ifrename package does not
> contain an init script (I don't think anyone knows which priority it
> should have)
You can create one at S:S40ifrename.
This was requested and discussed in #243382. In that thread, J.T. said
at one point t
also sprach Guus Sliepen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.1742 +0100]:
> Well, everything is better than having the discussion spread over
> several bug reports. At least the Wiki can provide a summary of the
> issues. As this hopefully won't be a long-lasting discussion, I don't
> think creating a
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 05:18:56PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> > http://wiki.debian.net/?InterfaceRenaming
>
> I do not find a Wiki to be a discussion tool.
>
> Can't we stick to email, create a mailing list for this, or move to
> debian-devel?
Well, everything is better than having the dis
also sprach Guus Sliepen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.1517 +0100]:
> Rather than reassigning bugs again, I have created a Wiki page where we
> can discuss this problem in a more constructive way (hopefully):
>
> http://wiki.debian.net/?InterfaceRenaming
I do not find a Wiki to be a discussion
severity 294180 important
merge 294180 29
thanks
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 08:19:46AM +0100, Thomas Hood wrote:
> OK, I change my statement to "udev makes ifrename unnecessary in many
> cases."
>
> I agree with you that ifrename should be supported. It should certainly
> be supported when hot
15 matches
Mail list logo
