Bug#368228: About your wish for ifupdown changes...

2007-12-30 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
On Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 07:13:47PM +0100, Claus Fischer wrote: > Thanks for the nice package. > I'd say it goes a long way but isn't fully there yet > (for my particular needs). (...) > > Work needed: > - reject routes >those are not interface bound but sometimes necessary: > 10.0.0.0

Bug#368228: About your wish for ifupdown changes...

2007-12-30 Thread Claus Fischer
On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 10:42:35PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: : The only problem with the second one is that those kind of routes will : get lost when when the interface they are associated with is downed and : will not come back up again when you run '/etc/init.d/networking start

Bug#368228: About your wish for ifupdown changes...

2007-12-29 Thread Claus Fischer
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 07:18:30PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: : On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 06:59:59PM +0100, Claus Fischer wrote: : > SuSE once had a script /etc/routes which was ideal for that kind : > of setup. I've missed it badly on Debian. : : : Please do try the ifupdown-extr

Bug#368228: About your wish for ifupdown changes...

2007-12-27 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 06:59:59PM +0100, Claus Fischer wrote: > SuSE once had a script /etc/routes which was ideal for that kind > of setup. I've missed it badly on Debian. Please do try the ifupdown-extra package. It's not very well document but the /etc/network/if-up.d/20static-routes should