Re: Making NM portable

["Debarshi Ray" <debarshi ray gmail com>]

>> I'd actually rather just link to libnl on Linux and libroute on *BSD I
>> think, abstracting the two inside NM.  Because unless you want to
>> basically copy the functionality of libnl into libroute (which might
>> take a while) it's probably easier to just abstract it in NM.

> Going to agree with Dan here.  Not really a need to make libroute do what
> libnl does... we already have libnl.  We can create the necessary
> abstractions inside NetworkManager so we can work with either libnl or
> libroute.

Looking at it from the Inetutils aspect, there is a plan to implement
a portable 'route' using 'libroute', so if 'libroute' has support for
various kernels (including Linux), it makes it easy to write 'route'
as a client program using 'libroute'. Since I am trying to keep the
same interface for adding, deleting, showing, etc. across different
backends it would become really easy to write portable client
applications.

What do you think?

Cheers,
Debarshi