[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       busybox
Subject:    Re: Removing -n option from udhcpc
From:       Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux () googlemail ! com>
Date:       2018-02-06 19:58:07
Message-ID: CAK1hOcNWxA3TfWNVLbdqNTksQvzMbUNjw_2Moey+GVHXw3cTvg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Daykin, Evan <daykin@frib.msu.edu> wrote:
>>Please be more specific. They exited how? what are the messages from them?
> Sending discover...
> Sending discover...
> Sending discover...
> No lease obtained, forking to background. (ps shows nothing, it is dead)
>
>> Of course. If you gave -n to udhcpc, it will exit if lease is not obtained.
>>If you don't want this, don't give it the -n option.
>
> Understood, but in this case rebuilding and updating Busybox is a non-trivial matter.
>  We are wondering what the rationale is for this being baked-in,
> default behavior (networking/Config.src:55) instead of being specified in the interfaces file.

ifup is a rather primitive and inflexible method of managing networking.
I suggest using something better.

Once feeling sufficiently frustrated by users' reports, I wrote a
small rant about it:
https://git.busybox.net/busybox/tree/docs/ifupdown_design.txt

What other methods exist? I use this:
https://git.busybox.net/busybox/tree/examples/var_service/README
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]