Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 01:10:31 -0800 (PST) From: <hoanga@alum.rpi.edu> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: conf/62772: static_routes needs an example in /etc/defaults/rc.conf Message-ID: <200402130910.i1D9AVqE037014@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR conf/62772; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: <hoanga@alum.rpi.edu>
To: <kris@obsecurity.org>
Cc: <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: conf/62772: static_routes needs an example in /etc/defaults/rc.conf
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 01:06:20 -0800
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_15C4D_01C3F1CD.973860F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi there,
> The documentation is (surprise!) in the manpage.
> static_routes
> (str) Set to the list of static routes that are to be added
> at system boot time. If not set to ``NO'' then for each
> whitespace separated element in the value, a route_
> variable is assumed to exist whose contents will later be
> passed to a ``route add'' operation.
>Is that really unclear enough to require an example?
Thanks for the quick response. I had read the documentation
in the manpage as well and misinterpreted 'Set to the list of static
routes'
as 'please insert your static route here' rather than 'please
put a list of identifiers that are space seperated that will be used as
a
reference to route_ that containts all the options
you need to feed to the route command to add the route'.
I understand that this is documented if you read this very carefully
however I don't feel it's crystal clear to people who are slow to
read these manpages (like me).
After a reboot and realizing I was making a mistake I started
looking for an example to clarify exactly what the manpage meant.
(I personally like looking at examples to clarify manpage explanations).
In the end I just looked at /etc/rc.d/routing (after tracing the system
startup scripts) and and figured out how static_routes was parsed
and its relation to route_. This process took me about
a few hours of looking at the documentation, trying my own examples and
finally looking at the shell scripts for what I assumed was a 15 minute
change and check. So yes, I feel this is unclear. Considering the
large amount of examples and documentation that went into making
an IPv6 static route, a few lines for creating a static IPv4 route
wouldn't
hurt for someone else in the future.
Best regards,
Alain
------=_NextPart_000_15C4D_01C3F1CD.973860F0
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
<BODY>
Hi there,<br>
<br>
> The documentation is (surprise!) in the manpage.<br>
<br>
> static_routes<br>
> (str) Set to the list of static routes that are to be added<br>
> at system boot time. If not set to ``NO'' then for each<br>
> whitespace separated element in the value, a route_<element><br>
> variable is assumed to exist whose contents will later be<br>
> passed to a ``route add'' operation.<br>
<br>
>Is that really unclear enough to require an example?<br>
<br>
Thanks for the quick response. I had read the documentation<br>
in the manpage as well and misinterpreted 'Set to the list of static routes'<br>
as 'please insert your static route here' rather than 'please<br>
put a list of identifiers that are space seperated that will be used as a <br>
reference to route_<identifier> that containts all the options <br>
you need to feed to the route command to add the route'.<br>
I understand that this is documented if you read this very carefully<br>
however I don't feel it's crystal clear to people who are slow to<br>
read these manpages (like me).<br>
After a reboot and realizing I was making a mistake I started<br>
looking for an example to clarify exactly what the manpage meant.<br>
(I personally like looking at examples to clarify manpage explanations).<br>
In the end I just looked at /etc/rc.d/routing (after tracing the system<br>
startup scripts) and and figured out how static_routes was parsed<br>
and its relation to route_<netid>. This process took me about<br>
a few hours of looking at the documentation, trying my own examples and<br>
finally looking at the shell scripts for what I assumed was a 15 minute <br>
change and check. So yes, I feel this is unclear. Considering the<br>
large amount of examples and documentation that went into making <br>
an IPv6 static route, a few lines for creating a static IPv4 route wouldn't <br>
hurt for someone else in the future.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Alain
</BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_15C4D_01C3F1CD.973860F0--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200402130910.i1D9AVqE037014>