On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 23:29 +0100, "Xavier Chantry"
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Pierre Schmitz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Am Dienstag, 2. März 2010 09:39:19 schrieb Thomas Bächler:
> >> Personally, I would like to
> >> remove everything but basic ethernet support from initscripts (that
> >> would also include removing wireless, but some people were too strictly
> >> against that). What I am saying is, investing time into integrating more
> >> network stuff into initscripts is time wasted, as complex setups like
> >> bonding or bridging can be much better implemented in netcfg and the
> >> work should be spent on that instead.
> > I second this. We should concentrate on netcfg for network setup in future.
> > Initscripts will just get too complicated (e.g. they don't support ipv& atm)
> > while the same functionality is already provided by another package n core.
> > I would even completely remove the network and netfs deamon from initscripts;
> > but I guess there wont be much support for this. :-)
> I was saying that already back in 2007, took me just one minute to
> find the post
> Here is what iphitus answered :
> "Profiles came after INTERFACES, and INTERFACES will definitely not be
> removed. Many people still find them useful, particularly on desktops
> with static configurations - myself even. I do intend to increase the
> code share between these two, as there's a lot of duplication already,
> but that'll come later."
Still think that too, though code-share is not really practical now.
rc.d/network has it's place as it is so simple - I still use it on my
I agree with restraining rc.d/network. The wireless support is very
outdated already. Bridging/bonding can lead to complexities that
rc.d/network is too simple to handle, which is reflected in some of the