Alfred M. Szmidt <[email protected]> ha escrit: > So I'm reworking route (for the third time since I've always manage to > misplace it). Question is, should we support the old syntax for > route?
What is "old syntax"? Do you mean "route add|del ... netmask ...", etc? If so, then definitely - yes, we should. > Currently, I'm ignoring that, but before I go about adding it > to inetutils, the easy (and right since it will keep the real version > clean) solution is to have a shell script wrapper that would work like > `the old' route, what do people think? Let's split the task. Do it your way and I'll add the "old syntax" later, as I did for ifconfig. Regards, Sergey
