[gentoo-user] /etc/conf.d/net

[gentoo-user] /etc/conf.d/net

[David Corbin]

I emerged a bunch of stuff this morning, and got this:

--begin--
 * Gentoo is moving toward common configuration file for all network
 * interfaces. Thus starting from >=ppp-2.4.3-r10 the following files
 * are obsoleted and should be removed to avoid future confusion:
 *     /etc/conf.d/net.ppp0 - conflict with baselayout
 *     /etc/init.d/net.ppp0 - conflict with baselayout
 *     /etc/ppp/chat-default - unused by this version
 *     /etc/ppp/options-pppoe - unused by this version
 *     /etc/ppp/options-pptp - unused by this version

 * If you use the old net.ppp0 script, you need to:
 *    - upgrade to >=sys-apps/baselayout-1.12.0_pre11
 *    - set ppp0 parameters in /etc/conf.d/net (see example file)
 *    - remove conflicting files
 *    - upgrade net-dialup/ppp
---end---

I looked at /etc/conf.d/net.example and to me it's woefully unclear how I port 
my /etc/init.d/net.ppp0 to the new file/format.  Any pointers to more 
information would be welcome.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/conf.d/net

[Pablo Antonio]

Quick answer: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=4
-- 
Pablo A.
http://www.pablo-a.com.ar/
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/conf.d/net

[David Corbin]

On Saturday 19 August 2006 13:09, Pablo Antonio wrote:
> Quick answer: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=4

Well, I look there, and like the example file, there is nothing about ppp and 
where to put all the ppp options.  The closest thing is the ADSL, but it's 
not really helpful to me.

David
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/conf.d/net

[Philip Webb]

060819 David Corbin wrote:
> I emerged a bunch of stuff this morning, and got this:
> "Gentoo is moving toward common config file for all network interfaces.
> I looked at /etc/conf.d/net.example & it's woefully unclear
> how I port my /etc/init.d/net.ppp0 to the new file/format.

Yes, the dox are not as detailed as they sb.
To repeat my explanation to another troubled user a few weeks ago :

I needed  3  things to get it working :
(1) in  /etc/init.d , delete the old  net.ppp0  (or rename it neutrally)
& do 'ln -s net.lo net.ppp0' ;
(2) do 'rc-update del net.eth0 default' 'rc-update add net.ppp0 default'
(this is the bit which isn't adequately documented: anyone would think
that both are simply symlinks to  net.lo  so what's the difference ?
but in fact, it affects how Baselayout configures the connection);
(3) create a new  /etc/conf.d/net  following  net.example : mine is

  config_eth0=( "192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.0.255" )
  # We have to instruct ppp0 to actually use ppp
  config_ppp0=( "ppp" )
  # Each PPP interface requires an interface to use as a "Link"
  link_ppp0="eth0" # PPPoE requires an ethernet interface
  # Specify what pppd plugins you want to use:
  plugins_ppp0=( "pppoe" )
  # PPP requires at least a username.
  # It will use the password specified in /etc/ppp/*-secrets
  username_ppp0='user@isp'
  pppd_ppp0=( "updetach" "defaultroute" )

I found the  2 items  in the last line were required by testing items.
You may need a bit of trial+error to get it right for your system+ISP.

If you really can't get it to work, you can go on using Rp-pppoe:
just omit/reverse steps (1-2) & restore your old  /etc/conf.d/net ;
there's a section in  net.example  confirming this.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : purslow@chass.utoronto.ca
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/conf.d/net

[Alan Mckinnon]

On Sun, 2006-08-20 at 01:52 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
> 060819 David Corbin wrote:
> > I emerged a bunch of stuff this morning, and got this:
> > "Gentoo is moving toward common config file for all network interfaces.
> > I looked at /etc/conf.d/net.example & it's woefully unclear
> > how I port my /etc/init.d/net.ppp0 to the new file/format.
> 
> Yes, the dox are not as detailed as they sb.
> To repeat my explanation to another troubled user a few weeks ago :

Philip, 

Docs on /etc/conf.d/net are about as clear as mud from where I sit. The
last thing I need to figure out is what exactly is the difference
between config_eth0 and iface_eth0 entries?

config_eth0 simply does not work for me at all - if the net cable is not
plugged in, dhcp takes 60 seconds to time out.
But iface_eth0 realizes in less than a second that there is no network
cable and does the smart thing.

I once found a note in some other obscure doc that iface_eth0 seems to
be the syntax for ifconfig, while config_eth0 seems to be for iproute2.
Can anyone confirm or deny this?

alan


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: /etc/conf.d/net

[Alexander Skwar]

· Alan Mckinnon <alan@linuxholdings.co.za>:

> On Sun, 2006-08-20 at 01:52 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
>> 060819 David Corbin wrote:
>> > I emerged a bunch of stuff this morning, and got this:
>> > "Gentoo is moving toward common config file for all network interfaces.
>> > I looked at /etc/conf.d/net.example & it's woefully unclear
>> > how I port my /etc/init.d/net.ppp0 to the new file/format.
>> 
>> Yes, the dox are not as detailed as they sb.
>> To repeat my explanation to another troubled user a few weeks ago :
> 
> Philip, 
> 
> Docs on /etc/conf.d/net are about as clear as mud from where I sit. The
> last thing I need to figure out is what exactly is the difference
> between config_eth0 and iface_eth0 entries?

Oh, that's simple! config_eth0 exists and iface_* doesn't. Quite
clear, as far as I'm concerned.

> I once found a note in some other obscure doc that iface_eth0 seems to
> be the syntax for ifconfig, while config_eth0 seems to be for iproute2.
> Can anyone confirm or deny this?

Check out the documentation in /etc/conf.d/net.example. It'll deny
that iface_* is for one tool and config_* for the other tool.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Diplomatie ist die Kunst, mit hundert Worten zu verschweigen, was man
mit einem einzigen Wort sagen könnte.
                -- Saint-John Perse


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /etc/conf.d/net

[Alan Mckinnon]

On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 10:05 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> · Alan Mckinnon <alan@linuxholdings.co.za>:

> > Docs on /etc/conf.d/net are about as clear as mud from where I sit. The
> > last thing I need to figure out is what exactly is the difference
> > between config_eth0 and iface_eth0 entries?
> 
> Oh, that's simple! config_eth0 exists and iface_* doesn't. Quite
> clear, as far as I'm concerned.

Hmmm, it's now as clear as mud smeared all over a 100 foot black
obsidian monolith. If iface_* doesn't exist, then why does it work on my
machine? It not only works, but it works stably and well whereas
config_* is unstable, eg if it can't find a dhcp server it tends to hang
and wait forever. My /etc/init.d/net looks like:

iface_eth0="192.168.0.3 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
iface_eth1="dhcp"
modules=( "wpa_supplicant" )
wpa_supplicant_eth0="-Dipw2200"

eth0 is a wired on-board nic, eth1 is an ipw2200

> > I once found a note in some other obscure doc that iface_eth0 seems to
> > be the syntax for ifconfig, while config_eth0 seems to be for iproute2.
> > Can anyone confirm or deny this?
>
> Check out the documentation in /etc/conf.d/net.example. It'll deny
> that iface_* is for one tool and config_* for the other tool.

I read it, but it doesn't deny anything - it simply doesn't mention
iface_* at all. Maybe iface_* is deprecated, but I've used it since
2005.0 and that's what the docs said then. I haven't seen any updates
about it either. The baselayout ebuild has several checks at the end for
old deprecated files and veriables, but iface_* isn't one of them.

I'm using baselayout-1.12.4-r6

alan


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: /etc/conf.d/net

[Alexander Skwar]

· Alan Mckinnon <alan@linuxholdings.co.za>:

> On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 10:05 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> · Alan Mckinnon <alan@linuxholdings.co.za>:
> 
>> > Docs on /etc/conf.d/net are about as clear as mud from where I sit. The
>> > last thing I need to figure out is what exactly is the difference
>> > between config_eth0 and iface_eth0 entries?
>> 
>> Oh, that's simple! config_eth0 exists and iface_* doesn't. Quite
>> clear, as far as I'm concerned.
> 
> Hmmm, it's now as clear as mud smeared all over a 100 foot black
> obsidian monolith. If iface_* doesn't exist, then why does it work on my
> machine?

Maybe backwards compatability? Maybe it's simply ignored and the
system is working on pure defaults which fit to your system?

>> > I once found a note in some other obscure doc that iface_eth0 seems to
>> > be the syntax for ifconfig, while config_eth0 seems to be for iproute2.
>> > Can anyone confirm or deny this?
>>
>> Check out the documentation in /etc/conf.d/net.example. It'll deny
>> that iface_* is for one tool and config_* for the other tool.
> 
> I read it, but it doesn't deny anything -

True. Just like it doesn't deny the (hypothetical) existance of a
"alexander_skwar_is_an_idiot" configuration setting.

> it simply doesn't mention 
> iface_* at all.

Which means, that it doesn't exist, IMO. It makes no sense to mention
what does NOT exist, as this list would be endless. It only makes sense
to mention what exists, and this *should* be a complete list.

> Maybe iface_* is deprecated, but I've used it since 
> 2005.0 and that's what the docs said then.

Fine. And now we've got 2006.

> I haven't seen any updates 
> about it either. The baselayout ebuild has several checks at the end for
> old deprecated files and veriables, but iface_* isn't one of them.

File a bug about net.example not mentioning iface_* or about the baselayout
ebuild not checking for the deprecated variable.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Es ist ein Unglück, nicht genug Geist zu haben, um eine Rede zu halten
und nicht genug Selbsterkenntnis, um zu schweigen.
                -- Jean de la Bruyère


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list