Bug 29549

Summary: bug (& solution) in /etc/sysconfig/static-routes
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Linux Reporter: Tony Mossop <mossop>
Component: initscriptsAssignee: Bill Nottingham <notting>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 7.0CC: rvokal
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i386   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2001-03-05 17:24:17 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Tony Mossop 2001-02-26 14:52:56 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)


There is a mismatch between /etc/rc2.d/S10network and /sbin/route that
causes failure in the setup of static-routes read from the
/etc/sysconfig/static-routes file. The S10network script explicitly removes
all references to the "gw" gateway flag in the static-routes table that it
passes through to the /sbin/route command (a la sysV conventions). However,
/sbin/route follows BSD conventions and expects the "gw" flag before the
gateway address, failure to include this flag returns the error:
SIOCADDRT: No such device.



Solution: EITHER change the /etc/rc2.d/S10network script removing the
marked lines

[rm]              if [ "${bogus}" = "gw" ]; then
[rm]                /sbin/route add -$type $dest $netmask $mask $args
[rm]              else
                /sbin/route add -$type $dest $netmask $mask $bogus $args
[rm]              fi

OR

allow /sbin/route to understand both BSD and sysV syntax (i.e. have the gw
flag be optional). This is probably the better solution.



cheers
Tony



Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. see description
2.
3.
	

Actual Results:  see description

Expected Results:  see description

This bugzilla interface is really very irritating, I seriously doubt I'll
bother to do this next time. Is it still possible to send bug reports to
bugs ? As not all bug reports fit this forms
based approach.

Comment 1 Bill Nottingham 2001-02-26 14:57:35 UTC
No, you can't send bugs to bugs@redhat; however, at the top of the new
bug page is a 'Skip all this and go to the standard bug entry form' link,
which allows you to enter free-form text...

Comment 2 Bill Nottingham 2001-03-05 17:24:13 UTC
This was put there to work around problems with certain (broken)
config tools, that wrote silly things like:

etho net 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw eth0

which is, of course, bogus.

Comment 3 Bill Nottingham 2001-03-05 20:31:10 UTC
Will be fixed in 5.70-1; thanks!