On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 13:45:26 +0100, Jonathan Underwood <jonathan.underwood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > As mentioned in the thread back in 2005, the first step would be > submitting etcnet to for inclusion as a Fedora package. That can > happen independently of whether or not discussions of replacing > network-scripts happens, and what the outcome of them are. > > FWIW, I'd quite like to see etcnet in the repo as an alternative, so > if you want some help packaging it, drop me a line. That said, the > thing that is very unappealing to me about its design is the multitude > of configuration files distributed over several subdirectories. That's > subjective though. I think there are plusses and minuses to that. For scripting stuff, that can be a plus. When editing by hand its a pain to have to go so many places. When I switch to Fedora 8, I can look at trying to allow use of etcnet by turning off the network service and turning on an etcnet service. This would allow it to be installed without breaking other stuff. Once you started actually using it instead of the standard network service that would break the system-config-network tool, since it would be changing files that aren't being used anymore. If I have success with that, I may submit it as a package after running it for a while. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
