Re: Another possible bug in the network-backend (--set)

On Tuesday 13 July 2004 20:08, you wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I had some more time to have a deeper look at your mail,
>
> On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 00:56 +0000, Juan Luis Baptiste wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > and ifconfig:
> >
> > [root@laptop juancho]# ifconfig
> > eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:09:6B:53:FE:90
> >           UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
> >           RX packets:1509752 errors:546 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:546
> >           TX packets:2164302 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> >           collisions:10986
> >           RX bytes:447308679 (426.5 Mb)  TX bytes:522553572 (498.3 Mb)
>
> it has no IP address, although it's shown as active by ifconfig, I think
> that marking it as deactivated is a correct behavior
>
> 	Regards

IMO, this isn't  a correct behavior, because before setting the new 
configuration, the interface _had_ an IP address, so it should have it after.  
With this behavior, the only way to get the IP address back is by _manually_ 
bringing up the interface, with ifup eth0 or ./network-conf -d 
enable_iface::eth0::1, wich shouldn't be the way. If I modify the network 
configuration I expect to have my network configured as I told it to with 
gst, and that includes the IP address that is assigned via dhcp to my dhcp 
interfaces.

Cheers,
-- 
Juan Luis Baptiste
http://www.merlinux.org
http://knetworkconf.sf.net