Re: IP4Config and routes

On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 17:53 +0000, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Thanks! Very comprehensive.
> Is this part correct?
> "Routes cannot be used with the 'shared' or 'link-local' methods as
> there is no upstream network."
> We're using link-local. Might explain my troubles, but in this case we
> need a route even though we aren't dealing with an upstream network.

Well, if it is correct, we aren't even hitting the bit of the code where
it is enforced. (or at least I haven't spotted it)

I have traced the code and I am finding :

- nm_setting_new_from_hash() is being called 
- it is calling parse_one_setting()
- which then calls nm_setting_new_from_hash()
- the hash table has 2 properties inside(method,routes)
- one_property_cb() is called on both those properties and is successful
at adding them to the list
- back in nm_setting_new_from_hash(), g_object_newv() is called with the
property list (method and routes)
- a NMSettingIP4Config is constructed, and these properties are set:
 6(ignore auto routes), 7(ignore auto dns), 10(never default), 1(method)

Why is set_property not called for the routes property?
Is it because routes is a _nm_param_spec_specialized? (I'm not exactly
sure what the difference is between this and the regular glib param


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]