After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 550714 - PLD Linux support
PLD Linux support
Status: RESOLVED OBSOLETE
Product: NetworkManager
Classification: Platform
Component: general
git master
Other Linux
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: Dan Williams
Dan Williams
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2008-09-03 18:33 UTC by Patryk Zawadzki
Modified: 2012-08-24 14:35 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
patch against current svn trunk (95.99 KB, patch)
2008-09-03 18:35 UTC, Patryk Zawadzki
none Details | Review

Description Patryk Zawadzki 2008-09-03 18:33:11 UTC
The following patch adds support for PLD Linux.
Comment 1 Patryk Zawadzki 2008-09-03 18:35:24 UTC
Created attachment 117952 [details] [review]
patch against current svn trunk

Please note that the patch currently contains a copy of ifcfg-fedora with only one line changed. We are likely to need more than this little customization but I need to consult this with the rest of PLD developers.
Comment 2 Dan Williams 2008-09-05 16:03:22 UTC
Can you check and let me know how much customization?  If it's not a lot we should try to keep common code like we do between Fedora and Mandriva.  The plugins are fairly complex chunks of code and having to port patches between them would sort of suck if they were separate.
Comment 3 Patryk Zawadzki 2008-09-05 20:32:35 UTC
For now only the path will do. Some of the vars have different names in PLD but I think it would be fine to test for both if we need them (like both FOO=a and BAR=a would set the same option in NM).

How do we handle the path? A configure-time #define?
Comment 4 Dan Williams 2010-01-04 21:13:26 UTC
If there's not much that is likely to change then we might as well just have the ifcfg-rh bits build two plugins from the same code.  So we put the different stuff (like #defines for paths and the plugin name) into a separate header for each plugin and then build the appropriate plugin from the same sources.  Sound OK?
Comment 5 Patryk Zawadzki 2010-01-05 08:36:09 UTC
Sure, that makes sense.
Comment 6 Pavel Simerda 2012-08-24 14:35:17 UTC
If you're still interested in this bug report, please let us know.