Hi, Eric,
I have to admit that I am a little bit paranoid. It _could_ be a
problem if some other components in Bering-uClibc expect ifupdown to
do this kind of checks internally.
In the ifupdown used in Bering-uClibc 1.0.x, there are several
functions and variables to ensure we're not downing an
Jonathan,
I don't fully understand why this is a problem. I agree with you that
the error handling could be better but the interface is already
brought up and configured. By doing an "ifup lo" or "ifup eth0" you
try to enable an already enabled interface.
Doing an "ifdown lo" and "ifup lo" is
Hi, Luis,
Unfortunately, other interfaces also have the same problem.
I took "lo" as an example just because /etc/network/interfaces
contains "lo" by default. I do agree with you that basic
ifupdown functions work.
Best regards,
Jonathan
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 08:42:51AM +0100, Luis.F.Correia
Hi!
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Chang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 3:44 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [leaf-devel] ifupdown problem in Bering-uClibc V2.2.0
>
> Hi, list,
>
> To reproduce this problem:
>
> firewall# ifup lo
> RTNETLINK an
