There are several forks of the netcfg repository floating around. (Mine is over here: https://github.com/joukewitteveen/netcfg ). I noted that yours is missing quite some of Remy's commits. You could try to merge either my repo, or remy's: http://projects.archlinux.org/users/remy/netcfg.git/ ). Mine is ahead by a few commits. I must say I do not see the benefits of having two bugtracking systems. Why not use the existing one of Arch? Also, you did not copy all bugs. https://bugs.archlinux.org/?project=1&string=netcfg shows 25 in total. Regards, - Jouke On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 15:21, Alfredo Palhares <masterkorp@masterkorp.net> wrote:
Hello,
So i started a thread in arch-general[1] 2 weeks ago asking abou netcfg future. Thomas Bächler replied[2] to do something, so I did. :)
I forked the project to github[3] took my time to study the code and set a testing/debuging environment. I also copied all the the open bugs to the github issues page[4], so i can keep track of them for now, I left references to the bugs in the archlinux tracker for easy checking.
I closed 2 already fairly easy fixes.
But on this issue[5] i am divided in what direction to proced and my idea is:
Do a sanity check to INTERFACE (on src/connections/vlan) checking for chars that the kernel doesn't even accept because if sysctl doesn't recognize it we should not use it. I would apreciate opinions if its the "correct" thing to do.
NOTE: If you use my fork from the 2.6.x branch this bug will not be replicated with the given details due to the fix of a previous issue[6].
I have long term ideas for netcfg wich I will be sharing here.
[1] http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2012-February/024882.htm... [2] http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2012-February/024883.htm... [3] https://github.com/masterkorp/netcfg [4] https://github.com/masterkorp/netcfg/issues [5] https://github.com/masterkorp/netcfg/issues/4 [6] https://github.com/masterkorp/netcfg/issues/2
-- Regards, Alfredo Palhares