| 1 |
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 19:09:26 +0000 |
| 2 |
Roy Marples <uberlord@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> The stuff that handles our networking maybe written in A.N. |
| 5 |
> Other-Language (Mrs.), but keeping /etc/conf.d/net readable by a shell |
| 6 |
> script does have advantages. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
You need to define what shell (or subset) you want to parse it. 'sh' |
| 9 |
itself varies from platform to platform. The one we have is a softlink |
| 10 |
to bash so doesn't make any difference for Gentoo Linux except for |
| 11 |
limiting what can be written. I just tried variable redirection for |
| 12 |
example (which can be used to implement pseudo-arrays without using |
| 13 |
eval) - I was surprised it works in sh here - dunno if it works in BSD |
| 14 |
sh (doesn't on busybox). What you have on FreeBSD may be different from |
| 15 |
what's on Solaris. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Perhaps busybox sh might be a practical set to choose, for basic posix |
| 18 |
compliance. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
You could simply do something like: |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
ifconfig_eth0="\ |
| 24 |
10.1.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0;\ |
| 25 |
10.1.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0" |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
which means standard shell interpretation doesn't lose information, even |
| 28 |
if it's actually normally parsed by something else (chose ';' as a |
| 29 |
separator since ':' is used in ipv6 strings). |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
It seems to me that the problem you're trying to solve, is the |
| 33 |
implementation of baselayout on restricted systems. Reducing all |
| 34 |
init.d/conf.d and so on to a common denominator for everyone isn't |
| 35 |
necessarily the best way forward. A different approach could be to |
| 36 |
provide more than one baselayout; one for large systems, where |
| 37 |
expecting to have bash available isn't such a big deal, and one for |
| 38 |
limited systems, restricted to busybox-standard sh. Actually I kinda |
| 39 |
assumed that's what baselayout-lite was all about... |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
Kevin F. Quinn |
Archives