Re: [LARTC] Re: [ANNOUCE] iproute2 update

[Stef Coene <stef.coene@docum.org>]

On Wednesday 09 June 2004 22:37, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 21:21:52 +0200
>
> Stef Coene <stef.coene@docum.org> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 09 June 2004 01:31, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > But should we break existing scripts??  One possibility would be to
> > > make things case dependant (K = 1024 and k = 1000) or something like
> > > that.
> >
> > I vote for yes.
> > What we can do, is use an other name so the difference is clear that it's
> > not tc, but the new tc.  Mhh, why don't call this newtc?  Or tcnew?  Or
> > tc2? So people can use tc and not change the scripts, or use tcnew and
> > change all scripts accordingly.
>
> I don't want to fork or make the iproute2 utilities explicitly different
> from earlier versions. Do we really want to repeat the mess of proc tools.
>
> But, in this case the change is actually small and contained, I haven't
> heard one person who would be upset by switching.
>
> So the next snapshot will use 1000's for rates and 1024 for sizes as per
> the standard usage.
Isn't there a way to create 1 binary that can work like the old and the new 
version?  Depending on the name how the binary is executed, the ritgh version 
is choosen.  So you have tcnew and a link to it called tc.  If tc is 
executed, the old version is used, if tcnew is executed, the new version is 
used.

I know it sounds messy ...

Stef

-- 
stef.coene@docum.org
 "Using Linux as bandwidth manager"
     http://www.docum.org/
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/