Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2012 17:10:04 +0200 (CEST) From: sthaug@nethelp.no To: rizzo@iet.unipi.it Cc: adrian@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sysctl vs ifconfig vs other Message-ID: <20121007.171004.74748690.sthaug@nethelp.no> In-Reply-To: <20121007150219.GA76853@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> References: <20121007104330.GA75115@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <CAJ-VmokXxuF78HTk1SbirEwS9EP1G2RX0=LLrzMP%2B16G4-cc4g@mail.gmail.com> <20121007150219.GA76853@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Seconded; but compare to Linux which has mutiple different commands to
> > do networking, as well as 'net'. :-)
>
> we do too -- we have arp, route, ifconfig, sysctl and possibly
> more that i am not aware of.
Note that at least arp, route and ifconfig have been there since very
early BSD releases (they predate FreeBSD, as far as I know). sysctl
is from BSD 4.4 (I think, but I'm very willing to be corrected here).
What I'm trying to say here is that arp, route and ifconfig are in
some sense the original BSD commands to set/change networking params.
The Linux camp saw the need to introduce a new command ("ip") to do a
lot of what we do with ifconfig (e.g. VLAN manipulation) while FreeBSD
chose to add to the ifconfig command. I prefer the FreeBSD way - but
this is a matter of personal taste.
Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121007.171004.74748690.sthaug>