Ondrej Filip wrote:
> On 25.7.2011 18:07, Aris Lambrianidis wrote:
>> Interesting insight, Martin, good points, Alexander, I missed that post,
>> that was the train of thought I was following as well.
>>
>> Are there any thoughts of integrating this to the main source tree or
>> implementing some
On 25.7.2011 18:07, Aris Lambrianidis wrote:
> Interesting insight, Martin, good points, Alexander, I missed that post, that
> was the train of thought I was following as well.
>
> Are there any thoughts of integrating this to the main source tree or
> implementing something similar? Not having
Interesting insight, Martin, good points, Alexander, I missed that post, that
was the train of thought I was following as well.
Are there any thoughts of integrating this to the main source tree or
implementing something similar? Not having to deal with compiled packages is
much tougher to main
On 25.07.2011 19:28, Martin Mares wrote:
Hello, world!\n
I was wondering whether an "include" general option could be implemented as
to segment large BIRD configuration files to smaller parts, a lá BIND. This
should be trivial to implement I suppose, and could really help with
scripting and cla
Hello, world!\n
> I was wondering whether an "include" general option could be implemented as
> to segment large BIRD configuration files to smaller parts, a lá BIND. This
> should be trivial to implement I suppose, and could really help with
> scripting and clarity.
At the dawn of time, when we
Greetings Ondrej and all,
I was wondering whether an "include" general option could be implemented as to
segment large BIRD configuration files to smaller parts, a lá BIND. This should
be trivial to implement I suppose, and could really help with scripting and
clarity.
Thank you for your time,
