Others have commented on the usefulness of adding an explicit list of what should be included in the kernel. I second that. There's another thing that's tripped me up: While iproute2 compiles and installs easily (on a Red Hat 6.1 box), the documentation is in a format that - while not obscure to old Unix hands - requires compilation, which requires: "To make documentation, cd to doc/ directory and make there. It assumes, that latex, dvips and psnup are in your path." Which barfs because I don't have dvips. Nor is a source for dvips listed on freshmeat.net, nor is there any dvips*.rpm in Red Hat's own or contributed directories, or a dvips*.tar at sunsite ... so it must be a part of some set of utilities? It's wonderful that Alexey's written these core tools, but if documentation isn't to be obscure it should be provided in universally readible ASCII or HTML or manpage formats. I do see the link to an HTML version from 10/23/99 in the HOWTO's "Further reading" section - but are the docs the same a year later? Maybe the HOWTO should include full quotations of Alexey's documents so those of us who don't really care about learning to backdate our systems to include a full suite of obscure Unix typesetting utilities can read the stuff ... and not send stupid questions to this list that those docs answer. I have full respect for those who can typeset beautiful documents on Unix using the legacy tools - it's just a set of skills many have no use for, and it's strange to find lack of them a barrier to learning the latest routing capabilities. (Personally, I won't program using a visual tool, and won't typeset using a nonvisual one - to each h(er||is) own.) \/\/ I-I I T Blauvelt whit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
