Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:30:16 +0900 (JST)
From:      Toshihiko ARAI <toshi@jp.FreeBSD.org>
To:        nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams)
Cc:        freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] pccard_ether and removable_* variables
Message-ID:  <200109051230.f85CUGQ39840.toshi@jp.FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <15253.10889.977127.513674@nomad.yogotech.com>
References:  <15245.13394.275183.61715@nomad.yogotech.com> <200109011153.f81BrZL93078.toshi@jp.FreeBSD.org> <15253.10889.977127.513674@nomad.yogotech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
+ <15253.10889.977127.513674@nomad.yogotech.com>, Nate Williams wrote:

>> I ask for a review of the following patches.
>> 
>> A summary of a patch,
>> 
>> * Delete removable_interfaces and pccard_ifconfig.  However,
>> pccard_ifconfig is kept for compatibility in pccard_ether.
>> * Documentation of removable_route_flush and static_routes_<interface>.
>> * Modification of sysinstall, deleted a pccard_ifconfig, added
>> some entry to a menu, and some corrections.
>> 
>> http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~toshi/pccard-current-20010901.diff

> What's the purpose of the following lines of code:


>         # Clean the routing table
>         case ${removable_route_flush} in
> -       [Nn][Oo])
> +       [Nn][Oo] | '')
>                 ;;
>         *)      
> -               # flush beforehand, just in case....
> -               route -n flush -inet
> +               case ${gateway_enable} in
> +               [Yy][Ee][Ss])
> +                       ;;
> +               *)
> +                       route -n flush -inet
> +                       ;;
> +               esac
>                 ;;
>         esac
>         ;;

> In particular, why don't we flush the routing table if gateway_enable is
> set?  That's seems counter-productive.

No.  This condition is reverse semantics.
Therefore setting of removable_route_flush is ignored if gateway_enable
is YES.  This is a safe step for 'route flush' not to be executed
carelessly.

> Also, as I've mentioned before, is there anyway we can have the routes
> added via 'static_routes_<interface>' flushed when the interface is
> removed?  This seems to be a step in the right direction, and may
> obviate the need for removable_route_flush completely.

You may be just right.  However, 'static_routes_<interface>' is null
and void with DHCP.  Implementation of dhclient seems to surely deal
with 'dhclient-script', but I don't so know a lot about DHCP.

In addition, I do ease with this code personally.
I will want to keep this mechanism if you forgive me.

--
Toshihiko ARAI

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200109051230.f85CUGQ39840.toshi>