Victor Lowther wrote:
[snip]
Though I see a small problem: Ever thought about what happens if there
are multiple interfaces on different networks? Only one is valid to
mount the root-fs... Currently I've solved that by upping each interface
and then ping-testing the nfs-server... Any better ideas?
My current plan was to try and mount the NFS share forever, and maybe
panic and die if a timeout option was passed as a kernel parameter.
Yes, I have thought about it, and have come to the conclusion that it is
one of those problems that someone who actually uses it is better
equipped to solve. Writing the code to bring interfaces up and mount
filesystems is generic, writing code to see if servers are responding
depends on the environment -- the best way for me to handle it is to
make it dead simple for site admins to handle it.
I agree, the ifup and mount should be pretty generic.
Browsing through the code a bit more thorougly throws up a few questions:
- 'dhclient -nw': Why are you starting the dhclient in daemon mode?
Couldn't that pose problems when dhcp takes ages to acquire an adress? I
mean like, we've ifup'ed all interfaces and are allready in the mount
hooks without an ip. I guess we'd have to have a blocking mount-script
waiting for at least one interface to be really brought up or spew an
error message after a specific time out.
- default gw handling in dhclient-script: 'ip route add default' will
fail if there's already another default route (Again the case of
multiple interfaces). Would it be an idea not set a default route at all
and let a mount-script handle this?
- I'd suggest adding something like if-pre-up.d, etc. Would make it easy
to integrate wireless and/or wpa support.
- Why are you killing dhclient at the end?
Thanks for the great work!
Philippe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe initramfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
